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