Rural Dreams, Urban Living
Posted on Feb 10, 2010 - 03:58 PM
By: Tricia Edgar
There’s a debate amongst those of us suburban dwellers who have rural fantasies. We dream of chickens, of eggs, or sheep and spinning our own wool and knitting it into fantastic sweaters. We dream of mornings on the farm, pulling out pristine, dew-covered carrots from the ground and turning the earth. Surely, the reality is different from this. Just as the suburbs are not Leave it to Beaver and urban life is not all Sex and the City, I imagine that rural life is not the pastoral fantasy painted above. Yet it has a definite attraction for we urban and suburban gardeners, we displaced back-to-the-landers.
What’s the controversy, then? Well, there is a debate about rural versus urban and suburban living. Simply put, are humans better off joining together in urban areas, where they can build a complex infrastructure to support themselves? Sewage treatment, transit, and other goodies come with scale, and large numbers of people live in urban areas, not rural ones.
Or is it better to fly solo, or with the help of a few neighbors? Rural living can mean fewer building codes, which can lead to things like cob and straw bale building, passive and active solar design, wind power, and composting toilets. Great stuff, but let’s face it, rural living isn’t there yet. Although many possess a modicum of self-sufficiency, many others still depend on the power grid and less-than-adequate sewage treatment and need to drive long distances to get to stores.
There are some people who love the city and would stay there no matter what. They are deeply fond of their urban gardens and of the challenge of growing food on rooftops and balconies. They thrive on the diversity of thrift stores in the city and the growing connections with rural areas through farmers’ markets. They also love the capacity that city-dwellers have to share: for every person in a city of a million who is interested in learning how to spin or how to make cheese, there are many, many others. The ability to learn from others and to create joint educational opportunities is amazing, due to the scale of the city.
Then there’s the down side of urban life. Urban people don’t have to be cut off from nature, but it can be more challenging to find access to land to grow food in the city as it is presently designed. It’s often harder to get to walking trails surrounded by forest, too. While it’s not impossible to be a city kid who loves nature, it’s often more difficult to connect, especially when it’s so easy to move from home to car to office or school, and then back home again.
The city is a big animal, and it’s hard to shift the habits and thinking of urban dwellers. Yet this is exactly where we need to change, because it’s where the people are and it’s where people are making the greatest impact. Better transportation systems, more reuse and less consumption, and more food self-sufficiency are all critical issues for the urban environment and for ecosystems as a whole.
If those who are environmentally-inclined move to rural areas to pursue their straw bale dreams, does this mean that the city loses its advocates for change? Perhaps, to a degree. But maybe the two feed into each other. These former city-dwellers can reconnect the city to its rural neighbors, providing opportunities for current city-dwellers to develop new skills, eat fresh and local food, and learn about building practices that may not be allowed within city limits. Can urban and rural areas act as complementary inspiration to each other, driving each to more environmentally-friendly and trans-formative practices? I hope that it is so.
| Permalink |
|
Related Entries:
Show/Hide Comments (5)
By Matt on 01/10/2011
I have lived in both environments in my life. They are both unique and have pros and cons. Each bring a different element to your life: thoughts, views, patterns, etc. I feel everyone should have the chance to live in both of these different worlds.
By liver transplant on 02/22/2011
I grew up on a dairy farm and went to college to get a degree in political science. In a class I had, I wrote a 20 page paper about how urban sprawl was harmful to society. After college I moved to my state’s capitol city and learned that urban life is much nicer than I thought it would be. Now I have a house in the suburbs. I see how all three areas can change a person and how they are all important to society. If I was forced to choose, overall, I’d say the city life was my favorite, but only because of the friends I had during the time.
By Purest Colloids on 02/23/2011
I’m an Urban Animal by nurture. I grew up in the city, and have continued to live there throughout the start of my adult life. Does that mean I have to remain cut off from my suburban counterparts? Absolutely not. My best friend lives and operates a family farm just outside the city. One of my favorite things to do is go and help out whenever I can. I don’t have space for a garden here in the city, but I have partnered with my friend in order to maintain the ability to grow my own food. In turn, I help him by keeping his “business” in the eye of the urban consumer. I believe this is the future of the Urban/Suburban dichotomy. Sharing resources and partnering to merge the best of both worlds.
By family leisure on 02/26/2011
I couldn’t agree more. There needs to be a lot less “competition” between rural and urban areas, and a lot more collaboration. Both settings have so much to offer. If we could put aside our stereotypes and listen to what each has to offer, we might uncover some amazing environmentally friendly practices.
By Ferienparks Team on 04/05/2011
I’m origanlly from europe and here it is very similar with the competition between rural and urban areas. In my opinion it is great to have good mix. Its nice to go to a rural area if you prefer something more quite and the people to be a bit more friendly. Urban areas are also good if you prefer to to out a lot and do a lot of cultural things. The solution is to mix it up so you find your perfect place.
