Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mnetor.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!mnetor!sophie
From: sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley)
Newsgroups: net.garden,net.consumers
Subject: Re: Grass
Message-ID: <1286@mnetor.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 12-Jul-85 15:00:31 EDT
Article-I.D.: mnetor.1286
Posted: Fri Jul 12 15:00:31 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 12-Jul-85 17:26:58 EDT
References: <11461@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Distribution: net
Organization: Computer X (CANADA) Ltd., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Lines: 25
Xref: utcs net.garden:587 net.consumers:2558

> Grass is *terrible* stuff, unless you can eat it. It needs mowing,
> watering, de-weeding, etc., or it turns into a real mess. So why on
> earth does every house have a front lawn and a back yard that are full
> of *grass*? Why haven't we long ago realized that grass is the wrong
> stuff to put around our houses, and chosen instead some nice
> low-growing, no-maintenance ground cover that will force out weeds on
> its own and let people enjoy their little plots of land instead of
> having to slave over them to keep them looking "nice", by an arbitrary
> social standard?
> 
I think clover looks much nicer than grass myself and it is certainly
much easier to maintain.  Dandelions look nice when there is a whole
bunch of them, and they are edible when they are young.

> Possible reasons:
> 1) There is a vast conspiracy by the grass trust to force all homeowners
> into being servants of the entrenched interests.
> 
I like reason 1.  There is quite a bit of money to be made out of this
lawn business since grass is such a fragile thing.  I think lawns probably
developped as a way to flaunt one's fortune (one must have servants to
maintain a lawn).  Lawns are a bit like white bread, unhealthy status symbols.
-- 
Sophie Quigley
{allegra|decvax|ihnp4|linus|watmath}!utzoo!mnetor!sophie