Comment on Problem solved ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 4 weeks agoLawns became symbols of the elite in England, as wealthy landowners sought to show off their gains via the most ostentatious displays possible outside stately homes.
Colonizing landowners were keen to replicate the look of a manicured English garden. As such, English imperialism is somewhat to blame for lawns being created around the world, where they became a status symbol, and a sign of wealth and well-to-do.
kilgore_trout@feddit.it 4 weeks ago
What I don’t get is what’s the point of a garden with only 2cm-long grass in it?
SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
The point from from old England’s perspective is that keeping the grass at 2 cm requires a whole bunch of resources and people, so only the rich could afford it. Even today, any neighborhood with weeds growing instead of a 2cm lawn is instantly classified as lower class. There often is no practical use or sometimes use for games or walking is when forbidden because it’s a status symbol only.
It’s like asking what’s the point of owning a Bugatti Chiron that can go 400 kph when you’re stuck in the same traffic jam anyway.
jawa21@lemmy.sdf.org 4 weeks ago
It goes back to the origin stated here. It was desirable because they could afford to effectively waste a lot of acreage on a crop that had no benefit. Simply for show.
CommissarVulpin@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
That is the point. You’re basically trying to say “Look how rich I am, I can afford to have all this land dedicated to looking pretty and not being useful for anything else”
Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
it’s easier to walk in than a garden with only 100cm-long grass in it
also looks nicer than a barren garden with no grass