Thursday, July 28, 2011

The Cost of Lawns

Charlie Gardner looks at the U.S. (and Canadian) lawn fetish, required setbacks and costs (via Yglesias):
Pollan's essay is about the historic and cultural significance of the American front lawn, not the American residential setback, but the two are in many ways inseparable.  As Pollan shows, the intent of the setback at the outset was to mandate a grassy front lawn, whether it was wanted or not  either cost, social pressure or concerns about resale value will tend to discourage creative alternatives to the bluegrass turf rolled out, for one's convenience, by the developer.  And what is the expense required to maintain all of this yard space?
While other countries routinely incorporate lawns into their detached single-family neighborhoods, it appears to be only England's colonial children — the United States, Canada, and to a somewhat lesser extent, Australia, New Zealand and a handful of other places — that have embraced the idea of large, decorative and open front lawns.

I too find grass to be appealing to look at, but I damn well hate mowing it.  There aren't too many jobs out there quite as wasteful and pointless.  Why can't Monsanto genetically-engineer grass which grows to 2", then looks the same the rest of the year?  Damn you, reproductive cycle of grasses.

No comments:

Post a Comment