Vox Humana wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...


Vox Humana wrote:
Nature flourishes in my landscape, but it wouldn't be seen as
wild or unkempt by any reasonable person. Ironically, a
"natural" look probably takes more thought and care than a
rigid, formal design. Letting your yard become overgrown with
weeds and calling it "natural" is like letting your kids run
wild and celebrating their exuberance.

What defines the difference between "natural landscaping" and
unkempt? How do we know the difference between a Nieman-Marcus
yard and a Costco one? Do we have a gene for perceiving invasive
species?...


I would say that it is akin to the discernment of pornography vs.
art You know it when you see it. The introduction of the terms
"Nieman-Marcus and "Costco" reinforce my suspicion that there is
something far more emotional about this than landscape design or
plant selection.

What about parts of the country that have a Costco but no Neiman-Marcus?



I don't think it has anything much to do with
money. As my mother used to say, "You don't have to have money to
be clean." In other words, you can spend virtually no money and
have a great landscape. Mowing and pulling weeds is almost free.
You can generally befriend other gardeners and get divisions of
perennials for free. Starting plants from seeds is very
inexpensive. Propagating shrubs from cutting is nearly free. Of
course you do have to devote your time and effort. But really, if
you aren't putting some effort into your landscape, you are a
gardener, you merely coexist with the property. Gardening is not
passive.

I'm not saying that people who don't garden are bad, but as you
see, there are certain expectations placed on you based on your
setting. When you live in a city, there is a social contract and
certain laws. You have the advantage of pooling your resources
with the neighbors and in return you get fire, police, water,
sewers, cultural opportunities and so on. In exchange, people
expect you to conform to a norm that includes, among other things,
a minimum level of yard maintenance. If you live in a planned unit
development, the requirements may be higher. In a rural area,
there are fewer common benefits and lower maintenance requirements.

I think the concept of "invasive species" is a red herring. While
introducing invasives has a strong negative environmental impact,
it has little to do with your particular situation. I suspect that
if you had a well maintained yard full of invasive plants it
wouldn't be a code violation. Again, gardening isn't passive.
Since we aren't born with gardening expertise, one has to do some
research.

As for "natural" and "unkempt" - again, I think it hinges on the
concept of being purposeful and active as opposed to neglectful and
passive. Perhaps "natural" would better be express as "informal."
All landscapes have structure. There is a canopy of trees, a
mid-ground of shrubs and tall perennials, and a foreground of short
perennials and ground cover. There is thought put into sight
lines, just as one would compose a picture. There is consideration
given to leaf size, shape, color, and texture. Function is
considered - is the yard used for sports or relaxation. The
particulars of plant selection and hardscape material depends on
your location and can be skewed to minimize, but not eliminate,
maintenance.

--

Travis in Shoreline (just North of Seattle) Washington
USDA Zone 8
Sunset Zone 5