SKU: 61329388673
craigslist fiddle leaf fig

craigslist fiddle leaf fig 6-8ft Fiddle Leaf Fig

Sale price$21.11 Regular price$23.45
Save 10%

Shipping Estimate
USA
  • USA
  • CAN

Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Jul 13 - Jul 18

Promo Codes Available:

For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15

Description

craigslist fiddle leaf fig 6-8ft Fiddle Leaf FigDescription The fiddle leaf fig brings natural elegance to your home. Its stunning violin shaped leaves transform any room into a sophisticated sanctuary. This West African beauty has won hearts worldwide with its dramatic presence and surprisingly forgiving nature. With those iconic leaves reaching up to 18 inches long, Ficus lyrata creates an instant focal point wherever you place her. Shes an absolute status symbol among modern decorators and plant

Description

The fiddle leaf fig brings natural elegance to your home. Its stunning violin-shaped leaves transform any room into a sophisticated sanctuary. This West African beauty has won hearts worldwide with its dramatic presence and surprisingly forgiving nature.

With those iconic leaves reaching up to 18 inches long, Ficus lyrata creates an instant focal point wherever you place her. She’s an absolute status symbol among modern decorators and plant-lovers. She's traded her wild rainforest home for designer living rooms, and we think she's made the right choice! 

This fiddle leaf fig plant grows steadily at 12-18 inches per year indoors, gracefully reaching 8-10 feet of living sculpture that brings warmth and character to your space.



Care 

Do fiddle leaf figs need direct sunlight? 

Your fiddle leaf fig loves bright, indirect sunlight. She'll appreciate gentle morning sun if you gradually introduce it, but harsh afternoon rays can leave it looking stressed and unhappy. East-facing windows give brightness without overwhelming its delicate leaves.


Is the fiddle leaf fig high maintenance?

We like to think of the fiddle leaf fig as just having clear preferences (but truthfully she is high maintenance). She simply knows what makes it happy and isn't shy about showing you! Once you understand its rhythm, it’s quite the agreeable companion. 

It appreciates consistent care, stable placement (it's not fond of being moved around), and the right balance of water and humidity. Master these basics, and you'll have a stunning statement piece that rewards your attention with years of beautiful growth.


Is the fiddle leaf fig a good indoor plant?

The fiddle leaf fig makes an absolutely wonderful indoor plant for those who appreciate both beauty and purpose in their green companions. It's particularly special because it naturally purifies your air while creating that sophisticated, magazine-worthy look.

Its large, glossy leaves make any room feel more alive and welcoming. It's perfect for bright living rooms, spacious bedrooms, or that corner that's been waiting for something special to bring it to life.


Do fiddle leaf figs like being in a bathroom? 

Fiddle leaf figs love a bathroom with a window because it gives them that perfect combination of humidity and gentle light. The natural moisture from your showers reminds it of its tropical home. Just make sure there's good natural light.


Do fiddle leaf figs need sun or shade? 

Fiddle leaf figs thrive with bright light and gentle protection—bright, indirect sunlight is exactly what makes them happiest. Think filtered sunshine rather than deep shade or harsh direct rays. They need enough light to maintain those gorgeous, glossy leaves.


How do I know if my fiddle leaf fig is happy? 

A content fiddle leaf fig will show you its displeasure through its beautiful, upright posture and those glossy green leaves that seem to shine with health. You'll notice steady new growth and a general sense of vitality about it.


Do fiddle leaf figs need to be by a window? 

Your fiddle leaf fig definitely needs to be near a window that offers bright, indirect light for at least six hours each day to maintain healthy growth. Avoid placing it where cold drafts might reach it during winter—it demands consistency.

Windows facing east work beautifully, offering gentle morning light. South-facing windows can work too if you use sheer curtains to soften the intensity. 


Where should I put my fiddle leaf fig indoors? 

The best spots for your fiddle leaf fig plant are near an east-facing window, in a bright bathroom with natural light, or grouped with other humidity-loving plants to create a lovely little ecosystem. It's happiest at temperatures between 60-85°F (16-29°C).

Avoid high-traffic areas where it might get bumped or jostled, spots near heating vents or air conditioners, and any dark corners where it'll struggle.


How often should I water my fiddle leaf fig? 

Water your fiddle leaf fig when the top 2-3 inches of soil feel dry to the touch—typically once weekly during spring and summer, less frequently in winter. Base your plans on checking the soil rather than following a strict schedule. 

When you do water, give it a slow, thorough drink until water runs from the drainage holes. Consistency is what it appreciates most, helping prevent those dramatic responses it's known for.


Should I mist my fiddle leaf fig? 

Misting your fiddle leaf fig every few days helps create the humid environment it naturally craves, bringing a bit of that rainforest feeling to your home. Use filtered or distilled water to prevent spots on its beautiful leaves. 

You can also place it on a pebble tray filled with water or use a humidifier nearby—it'll appreciate any effort to increase the moisture around it.


Should I put coffee grounds in my fiddle leaf fig? 

Please skip the coffee grounds for your fiddle leaf fig—they can change the soil's pH and sometimes encourage mold growth, which won't make it happy. Instead, stick with a balanced liquid houseplant fertilizer every 1-2 months during spring and summer.


Are fiddle leaf figs sensitive to tap water? 

Fiddle leaf figs are sensitive to the chemicals commonly found in tap water, like chlorine and fluoride. Using filtered water, distilled water, or simply letting tap water sit overnight before using it can make a real difference.


What fertilizer should I use on my fiddle leaf fig? 

A balanced, liquid houseplant fertilizer works wonderfully for fiddle leaf fig fertilizer needs—dilute to half strength and apply every 1-2 months during the growing season. During fall and winter, let it rest without any feeding. It's quite sensitive to over-fertilizing.



Pet-friendly?

The fiddle leaf fig isn't safe for pets, as it can cause oral irritation, drooling, and digestive upset if your curious companions decide to sample its leaves. While it's not severely toxic, it's best to keep it out of reach of both cats and dogs who might be tempted to explore.


Are fiddle leaf figs poisonous to cats?

Fiddle leaf figs can cause oral irritation, excessive drooling, and stomach upset if cats chew on the leaves. The sap can also irritate skin, so it's definitely a "look but don't touch" plant for both you and your feline friends.


Are fiddle leaf figs toxic to dogs? 

Fig leaf trees can cause mouth irritation, drooling, and digestive issues if dogs nibble on the leaves, so consider keeping in a room where your dog doesn't usually spend time, or up high where those exploring noses can't reach.


Factoids

How fast do fiddle leaf figs grow? 

When well cared for, fiddle leaf figs grow at a satisfying pace of 12-18 inches per year indoors, gradually developing into tall living sculptures… or just skip a step and buy our fiddle leaf fig that’s 9-10 feet tall already. Growth depends on consistent light, proper watering, and seasonal changes.

Fiddle leaf figs are most active during spring and summer, taking a natural rest during the cooler months. 


Do fiddle leaf figs clean the air? 

Your fiddle leaf fig does double duty as both a beautiful statement piece and a natural air purifier. It removes common household toxins like formaldehyde, benzene, and trichloroethylene, while adding fresh oxygen wherever you decide to place it.

NASA's Clean Air Study recognized fig plants as effective air cleaners, so it's essentially a living air filter that happens to look absolutely stunning while doing her job.


Do fiddle leaf figs represent anything? 

Fiddle leaf figs symbolize prosperity, abundance, and good fortune. They're also obviously symbols of excellent taste in interior design circles! In feng shui traditions, large leafy plants like the fiddle leaf fig tree represent growth and abundance.


How did fiddle leaf figs get their name? 

Fiddle leaf figs earned their charming name because of their distinctive violin-shaped leaves. It got its botanical name Ficus lyrata because of the lyre, a stringed instrument similar to the fiddles that are played in folk music.



Buy a Fiddle Leaf Fig

The Fiddle leaf fig is perfect for plant parents who appreciate both beauty and character. Give it what it needs, and it’ll reward your care with years of gorgeous growth and undeniable style. You can even choose one of the Full or Huge sizes on a call with our experts. 

Our fiddle leaf fig trees make stunning statement pieces that start conversations and pull in admiring glances with their graceful presence and air-purifying benefits.

Shipping Notes
  • Free Standard Shipping on $100+ Orders to the USA.
  • Except Preorder products are shipped in 48 hours.
  • Delivery to the USA:
  1. Standard Shipping : 3-10 business days
  • If time is of the essence, please consider selecting expedited delivery for faster service.
Exchange/Return Notes
  • We offer a 30-day return/exchange service after receiving.
  • Final sale items are not eligible for returns or exchanges.
  • To process your return/exchange, please contact us at [email protected]
  • Please click here for more details>>> Return & Exchange Policy
SKU: 61329388673

Discover Niche Categories That Outsell craigslist fiddle leaf fig

Top-Converting Item to Boost Your Average Order

4.6 ★★★★★
Based on 198 reviews
Sort
Highest Rating
Newest First
Oldest First
Product Reviews
G
Verified Purchase
garynini
Los Angeles, US
★★★★★ 5
Clear, cogent, and illuminating
Format: Kindle
Clear, cogent, and illuminating explanation of the difference between two approaches to interpreting the Constitution: originalism and the Living Constitution
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on September 18, 2015
C
Verified Purchase
Chris Morton
Charlottesville, US
★★★★★ 5
Excellent!!!
Format: Kindle
A wonderfully refreshing argument for "the living constitution". Most surprisingly is that much of the argument is based in the philosophy of Edmund Burke, father of modern conservatism.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on February 22, 2017
M
Verified Purchase
Matt Cockerill
West Palm Beach, US
★★★★★ 5
Five Stars
Format: Hardcover
Strauss demolishes originalism in a concise and accessible volume.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on November 11, 2014
S
Verified Purchase
Stephen J. Jaros
New York, US
★★★★★ 3
Ultimately disappointing .. but still a good read
Format: Hardcover
This book does have a few commendable features. It is written in laymen's language, you don't have to be a constitutional law scholar like David A. Strauss to comprehend the arguments. And it's short. Won't take more than a couple of hours to read. But as a critique of the "originalist" constitutional doctrine, it is hit and miss. For example, Strauss argues that originalism has three major flaws (p.18): 1) the impossibility of determining what the understanding of the founding fathers was on a particular issue. 2) the impossibility of translating an original understanding so that it addresses today's problems. 3) no answer for Thomas Jefferson's question about why we, the living, should be governed by the "dead hand" of past generations, including the founders. Of these three, the first is the most telling, because it is indeed sometimes the case that we do not know what the founders would have thought about a particular issue, because that issue simply did not exist at the time of the enactment of the constitution or a particular amendment, or because that original meaning could be lost to history. The patent-ability of new life forms as a result of genetic engineering being a good example (but, other technological examples, like cases related to airplanes and cars, are NOT good examples, since while the founders were unaware of these technological advances, it's safe to assume they would recognize them as transportation vehicles, so their understanding of ships and horse carriages would apply to them). That's why i am what Strauss might call a "sometimes originalist" - my view is that IF there is no reasonable doubt about what the enactors of a constitutional provision would have thought about a case, then that should control the decision a court arrives at. But obviously, if the issue was unknown to the enactors, or if their views are forever lost to us due to the passage of time, then there is no "original understanding" of that particular issue, and some other method of constitutional interpretation must be relied on. The second and third objections are far less compelling to me. The second objection is IMO a non-issue. To ask "well, we know that in 1880 the enactors of the 14th amendment did not believe its equal protection clause outlawed employment discrimination against women, but would they believe that if they were living in the year 2000, with all the economic/cultural/technological changes that have developed over those 120 years?" is an irrelevant question. It's like asking if the 1969 Congress that enacted the Clean Air Act would still enact it if that Congress were to debate the issue in 2010: it's purely speculative and ungermane, since neither statutes nor constitutional provisions have expiration dates on them. Likewise, the 3rd objection is both shallow and disingenuous. Shallow because Jefferson clearly understood that the constitution, like laws enacted by the legislature, are subject to change by later generations, who can amend the constitution or pass new legislation to supersede what previous generations have accomplished. Disingenuous, because the invocation of Jefferson seems to be a tactical decision by Strauss, a way to tweak originalists by citing one of the very greatest of our founding fathers. Yet Jefferson can also be quoted to support an originalist view. For example, in 1801 he said: "The Constitution on which our union rests, shall be administered by me according to the safe and honest meaning contemplated by the plain understanding of the people of the United States, at the time of its adoption....These explanations are preserved in the publications of the time, and are too recent in the memories of most men to admit of question." (Writings of Thomas Jefferson, quoted from a letter dated 3/27/1801). The first part of this quote clearly indicates that Jefferson believed that constitutional provisions should be interpreted according to original understanding, not "modern, evolved" standards of meaning as David Strauss would contend. The second part speaks to the need i identified before, that of knowing within the bounds of reasonable doubt what the enactors understood a provision to mean. Beyond all this, though, is David Strauss's contention that a "living constitution", as defined by a common-law like accretion of judicial precedent in constitutional matters that leave the original meaning of the text behind, is necessary because otherwise our constitution would become an archaic relic unable to meet the demands of a changing society, and that the formal amendment process is too slow and cumbersome. Professor Strauss correctly notes that Jefferson believed that our institutions must evolve with the development of society; however, he crucially fails to note that to Jefferson, the primary mechanism of such innovation was to be the actions of the legislature. Constitutional provisions are expounded in broad, general language not to enable future judges to interpret them in light of changing societal conditions, but to permit elected bodies, like legislatures and congress, wide latitude to address the problems of today. Legislative bodies, which directly reflect the ebbs and flows of societal change and are accountable to the people, were Jefferson's preferred vehicle of constitutional innovation, not the decisions of insulated, life-tenured court judges. On this point, unlike on many others, Jefferson was in agreement with John Marshall. As Jean Edward Smith (1996) writes "When (in McCulloch v. Maryland) Marshall spoke of the Constitution as "intended for ages to come" and of the need to adapt it "to the various crises of human affairs", he was alluding to the responsibility of Congress, not the Court. And the limits on Congress were defined by the political process, not the judiciary" (p. 445). Thus, for example, while the enactors of the 14th amendment did not intend for it to ban employment discrimination against women, it also was not intended to prevent Congress or the state legislatures, at the time of the enactment or in the future, from enacting legislation that does protect women from employment discrimination should that type of legislation be deemed necessary or advisable. Jefferson was far more wary of "innovative" actions by judges, exemplified by his belief that "if federal judges have the final word over its meaning, the Constitution would be a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please". Yet it is exactly this type of judicial activism that Strauss means when advocates a "living constitution". Strauss's fundamental error is revealed on page 103 when he says that "We cannot say that the text of the constitution does not matter ... no (textual) provision of the constitution can be overruled in the way a precedent can, or disregarded the way original understandings often are". What Strauss is saying here (well, he wouldn't put it this way, but this is my view of the matter) is that when a judge wants to be activist, to impose his/her personal policy preferences on a case, it's very important that the judge somehow, through clever verbal gymnastics, no matter how convoluted, "ground" that ruling in some actual constitutional-textual language. This is very important for achieving the political purpose of maintaining respect for the court in the eyes of the public. But to me, Strauss creates a false dichotomy: The text of the constitution is ONE AND THE SAME with its "original understanding". The 'text', the actual words of the constitution, does not exist independent of the original understanding of those words, the text is merely the communicative vessel used to convey that original understanding. That's the way language works. It's a method to convey meaning. Thus, to invoke the Due Process Clause of the 5th amendment to outlaw Federal segregation laws (as the Court did in 1955) when the enactors of the 5th amendment clearly (as Strauss admits) did not intend for it to mean that, is the SAME THING as ignoring the "text" of the constitution, since the text and original understanding are one and the same. Overall, i recommend this book. One will learn alot about constitutional history, and Professor Strauss is surely correct in that the "living constitution" view is in fact the dominant way in which the Court has gone about its business in practice, regardless of what legal theoreticians have thought. But, don't expect to be convinced by much Professor Strauss has to say about why this is a good thing.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 18, 2010
R
Ross L. Meyer
Omaha, US
★★★★★ 5
Originalist v Living Document , 5 - 4
Format: Hardcover
I found the author's arguments to be logical and compelling. Those who embrace the so-called originalist view of the Constitution, for example Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, claim that they know - with great certainty - the absolute intent of the Constitution's authors. Further they claim that the Constitution provides specifics and principles which of course it does. It is simple to understand the specifics, but what about the principles? Principles, it seems to me, can and do have differing interpretations. One of the definitions of the word principle found in Merriam-Webster states, "a moral rule or belief that helps you know what is right and wrong and that influences your actions." As we all know, rules and beliefs frequently mean different things to different people. If it were not so, Supreme Court decisions would inevitably be decided 9 - 0. Many are familiar with the Supreme Court's case District of Columbia v. Heller in which Justice Scalia opined that the Second Amendment shouldn't stop the U.S. from barring certain weapons. While his opinion certainly seems reasonable to me, I cannot find that principle in the Constitution. Rather it seems to be a logical conclusion based on modern society, mores, and laws - perhaps, as Professor Strauss argues, Common Law. Whether one accepts the originalist view of the Constitution or, as I, believes a living interpretation of the great document is preferable, the one thing we can all agree on is that our nation is one of laws. To that end, it is incumbent on all citizens to accept and abide by the pronouncements of our judges, agree with them or not.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on November 18, 2014

recommand products