RE: (OT) the evolution of American lawns

Dean and Claire,

Apologies for late response - have been computerless for a few days.

You have certainly whetted my appetite on this subject.  Dean, I will try
and get the book recommended by Claire from the library (thanks Claire), so
there is no need for you to struggle in your attic - many thanks for the
offer though.

Valerie
Sth Yorks, England

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-perennials@mallorn.com
[o*@mallorn.com]On Behalf Of ECPep@aol.com
Sent: 29 August 2000 0:57
To: perennials@mallorn.com
Subject: Re: (OT) the evolution of American lawns


In a message dated 8/28/00 10:40:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
deanslgr@juno.com writes:

<< > Dean, would this article be available on the internet?
 >
 > Valerie


 I doubt it.  I did a cursory glance of the Natural History on-line
 archive  http://www.amnh.org/naturalhistory/  and it looks like only
 featured articles are archived in their entirety.  Magazines do tend to
 encourage people to subscribe, after all.  ;-)  The next time I'm up in
 the attic I'll see if I can find the issue in which that essay appeared.
 Going up into my bookshelf filled attic is not something randomly
 undertaken! >>

Dean and Valerie,

You can find a similar discussion in "Second Nature, a Gardener's Education"
by Michael Pollan,  ISBN 0-385-31266-0.  The chapter, "Why Mow" is entirely
devoted to lawns and how they happened to become such an obsession in
America.   This book is in libraries or easily purchased softcover.


Roughly summing up, you guys in the midwest started it all with a book by
Frank Scott that advocated lawns connecting one to the next so the
subdivision (or estate or whatever your area calls it) looked a one rolling
green park.  The second part would be the invention and improvement of the
lawn mower.

Other areas of the world valued privacy more than rolling estate greens.
Scott describes the Brits "inhospitable brick walls".  This was
unneighborly,
unchristian and undemocratic.   The Chicago area began the zoning laws that
established setbacks, sideyards and the percentage of land that could be
occupied by buildings.

This is facinating stuff as it spread all over the US making the
improvements
of existing housing a "hardship" if a proposal violated these rules.  Should
you want a garage and your percentage is used up, you need a hardship
permit.

I lived in a town once that had a limit of solid fencing,  four feet.  Over
that got you a date in front of a judge.  When I inquired what was the basis
for this idiotic law, the answer was safety.  They did not want any riffraff
running around the shrubbery.  The reality was that the town was filled with
State University employees and began as very progressive.  Frank Scott had
an
influence there.  Present town administration has no idea of this movement
of
the last century.

To each his own, I should like to have something marking landlines between
properties.

Claire Peplowski
East Nassau, z4

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE PERENNIALS

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE PERENNIALS
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index