  urlLink Rose - 'Blue Girl', photo taken in my garden, May 2003&nbsp; urlLink &nbsp; Up until this year, the rose in the photo above was the "bluest" rose available, and, as you can see, calling it " blue " is a bit of&nbsp;a stretch.&nbsp; There are definitely faint&nbsp;tinges of periwinkle/lavender on the edges, but really, any&nbsp;normal person taking a quick glance&nbsp;at that rose would call it pink.&nbsp; You have to look really hard to see the " blue ". There's a very&nbsp; " purpley " rose called urlLink 'Rhapsody in Blue' that's been available in the UK&nbsp;for a few years and is being tested by AARS in the US right now, and as gorgeous as it is, I think the average layman would still call it purple.&nbsp; That won't prevent me from including it in my garden though -- I love the color.&nbsp; I've read it will be available for retail sale&nbsp;in the US&nbsp;by 2006.&nbsp; I can't wait! I do have another " blue " rose that grows next to 'Blue Girl', called 'Lagerfeld', (both are Hybrid Teas),&nbsp;and it&nbsp;is even less "blue" than 'Blue Girl', but since blue is not a color natural to roses, beggars can't be choosers.
&nbsp; Until now.&nbsp; &nbsp; There has been some recent,&nbsp; urlLink ground-breaking research in the area of blue roses, and we could see them in florist shops as early as next Valentine's Day.&nbsp; (Wouldn't that be an interesting message to send your loved one -- a bouquet of blue roses! )&nbsp; A biology/biochemistry/botany geek might appreciate a more scientific explanation urlLink here &nbsp;and urlLink here . &nbsp; I, for one, cannot wait until such a true- blue rose is available to purchase as a shrub to be planted in my garden! 
