Plantcraft is based on geography, climate, and the needs of the users. The first question we should ask is for an introduction to the land. Then we ask: what are the intentions here? where are we, and for whom, and what purpose, are these plants?

Sometimes It's Lawns: An Essay https://twitter.com/gothfemme/status/1286683194184675328

Now firstly, we have to accept that the Internet is too big of an audience to be an audience! The OP here was directly addressing settlers in the United States, who historically seek recreate themselves as English aristocracy through claiming property, such as by having a green.

However, if someone is giving gardening advice without reference to geography, the advice itself is useless, because plants are quite literally rooted in the geography. Telling the entire planet to "plant more trees uwu" is garbage when our planet is a largely a grassland planet.

So, when I see stuff about lawns on social media, I respond: what land are we speaking of, and what are their intentions of the current custodian?

(Northern Europe plus foot traffic and small domestic animals tends to automatically become "lawn".)

Here are some of the virtues of grass as a groundcover:
It resists foot traffic. This is immense. It is not killed underfoot.
It resists tearing and erosion.
It builds a root matrix and retains moisture and topsoil.
It filters piss and shit.
It pulls carbon down into the soil.

Grass is edible (the foundation of most human food supplies) and nontoxic; safe for pets and children to play on and eat.
Leaves are food for rabbits and chickens. Seeds feed wildlife.
When harvested, grass clippings are green manure, mulch or (prepared correctly) animal fodder.

Grass is an acceptable groundcover for mobility devices, so in areas with competing accessibility needs, it's...okay. It isn't ideal, but many people don't consider how wood chippings and gravel work with wheels or canes.
Grass is sensory, can be pleasant underfoot.

In temperate climates, grass as a native groundcover needs nothing. There is literally no need to pour poison or water on it. It gets rain and birdshit!
("Oh but Jeff in Arizona uses pesticides and drinking water"
Ya I bet he does, the fucker! Go tell him not to! Be specific!)

Like when grass turns yellow in the summer, it's just going dormant

Grass lawns in their own place get their own food and water, and sort their own lives. If they don't, then we've answered the first question: it isn't a place for a grass lawn. Done

& If they're fine, keep them

So some places where grass lawns, if acceptable in that geography and climate, make the most sense include:

Where children play.
Where you keep poultry or rabbits.
Where people keep dogs.
Where there is foot traffic.
Where outdoor activities have mixed access needs...

Looking at this you might say, "oh, actually it makes sense to have grass lawns as, like, a sort of communal property in the center of a community! And people could put those animals and activities THERE!"

Yes! You could even call it "Common Ground" or maybe just "the commons"

(A large communal grassland, nibbled to lawn-height, was once called a "common" and centred at the heart of village life in England. People who study the history of work are introduced to "The Tragedy of the Commons," which is a rather mangled moral fable...)

(Anyway, the idea of the grass common is that every "common person" can bring their goose to graze "in common", and support themselves on the eggs and meat even without owning it as private land. The common could also host activities like fairs or sports.)

We can all go read our histories of the common people in Europe and how they became the working class in our own time

But i think it would be funny if we referred to "intellectual commons" and creative commons etc. as "The Intellectual Shared Grass," I think that would be good

So when we approach a person with a tiny cottage garden in England that is too small to grow sweetcorn or multiple pumpkins, and ask: what ground is this

First I'll say: how did you get here

And then: this ground fed sheep for 2000 years so it's... pretty keen on being grass

"What are your intentions for this plant and this space"

It is the size of a few double beds. We let it grow out for birdseeds, i pick and braid it for textiles. We cut it 2x a year for compost. The chickens and children eat it, like, relentlessly

No other plant could take this abuse, the poor stuff. It's where the laundry line is, it's btween the house and the sheds/chickens/raised beds/compost. Clover would call the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Plants on us. I admire these grasses and sit with them every day

So you can see: hm, the space, and the intention, are part of the plantcraft. Sometimes a grass lawn is the answer to these questions. As common property? As groundcover in a small space? Yes! We have many ways of living, and many grounds. NOW we can turn to Jeff in Arizona

Whenever I start talking about #grassfandom (its a grassroots movement guys) people just start jumping around with their hands up, going BUT BUT BUT BUT WHAT ABOUT JEFF IN ARIZONA ELODIEEEE

POISONING THE COLONIZED GROUND TO HAVE AN ASTROTURF LAWN

POURING DRINKING WATER ON IT

"We meaaaaaaant Jeff in Arizona Elodie!!! We dont care about YOUR grass"

Yes if you mean Jeff in Arizona, then tell Jeff in Arizona? The average citizen of Earth is a woman living in China. Jeff won't know youre criticising HIM if you don't tell him.

So what land is Jeff in Arizona on? It is colonized desert ground, AstroTurfed in green. It is a terraforming experiment: if he doesn't provide continuous life support, it simply dies; nature reclaims the ground. Now, some keepers of houseplants DO enjoy this kind of thing,

I dont judge keeping one or two indoor plants on life support!! why not, "indoors" is an environment too. But let's get real Jeff, you can't have landscaping on life support. Fails the first fence. Absolutely absurd. Give the land back. Off you go.

But what are Jeff's intentions? It's worth asking. The quick answer is, "to imitate the English aristos who had the excess space to display their own grass common, indicating their wealth with a public landscape made private, of use only to themselves, not the common people."

I think these are intentions worth answering, because they tell us about America and colonisation and whiteness, but also about our views of land justice and usage: public vs. private, decoration vs. working space. Honestly, this is a discussion about art and community space.

But it is a disservice to plantcraft to turn "grass" into background; it is viewed here as passive flooring material, as linoleum, except where people describe it as an invasive immigrant: destroying what is good, consuming resources and causing scarcity.

Bring grass to the foreground: it is the plant on which civilizations rest. Grasses give us our dairy, meat, maize, wheat, rice, they feed our grazing animals; they were our first fuel. We love them. When did they become less than floor, our eyes skimming over them with contempt?

Grass is a plant of the people. Grassroots hold the ground together. If we see a rolling lawn bigger than what a family's chicken's can eat - bigger than the immediate needs of one family - we should ask not "why is this grass" but "why isn't this a common?"

(Also when people criticize lawns - fairly!! - they suggest doing something "more useful" with the land, like a vegetable garden. Again: what is the land, what are the intentions? If grass is felt to take too much maintenance and resources, vegetable gardens are... more. harder.)

(Also we need to examine the idea that every inch of the planet is "property" that needs to be "useful."

And the idea that the planet's true/perfect state is a mossy, Tolkienesque, Northern European forest with no people in it.

Vegetable gardens & trees are not always Better)

A grass lawn, as a huge private piece of landscape jealously guarded by Jeff, is a tragedy partly because it is a huge piece of ground being jealousy guarded by Jeff. Please consider that if this specific plant and use is "bad," it is also bad to have huge private rose gardens.

So now we have separated the piles and our hands are free. We can now say: what IS it that broke in us, in our minds & hearts and the brains we bring to the land, that people in America are recreating the English village common for their personal private use? What the hell?

We can picture a Healed World and understand that there will actually be "lawns" in the parts of the Healed World that support grass lawns, because of the delightful nature of humans to picnic at every opportunity. Grass is the plant of parks and commons and foot traffic.

We can understand that "anti-lawn sentiment" has a rightful place in the architecture of #LandBack, conservation, permaculture, reparation, environmental justice, saving the world generally, etc. While also remembering plantcraft: what land is this? What am I bringing here?

When we speak on the Internet, we are necessarily speaking across geography and climate. We are bringing ourselves as individual voices addressing the entire planet. Centering the American grass lawn, the common-in-captivity, is interesting! but most useful when focused on Jeff.

I mean its also fine to just. Hate grass. Just violently find it revolting. You can do that too. As long as you've considered whether some of the rage is because Oh My God They Privatized The Commons. LITERALLY. And Then EXPORTED IT And Called It Landscaping

But when we understand that "lawn culture" is separate from the plant, and we examine them separately, we maybe aren't mad at grass as much as we are mad at, perhaps, capitalism?

We can look at our beliefs around things like beauty and utility. If we hate "pouring poison and drinking water on a private status symbol with no utility other than the pleasure of a private individual and maybe a bit of compost" then that's a decent stance, good for the soul

I mean, adopting this stance myself has changed how I feel about things like horse ownership. It's a similar thing: taking up land & pouring priceless resources into a leaky vessel for a lil pleasure. and I love horses, so. Its certainly more COMFORTABLE to just stay mad at lawns

"People are NOT going to like the horse tweet," i tell myself, pressing the Tweet button anyway. "I'll lose them on the horse tweet."

But yah people will @ you with "actually I hate terraformed lawns that are poisoned!"

ma'am that's not a bold stance we're cancelling horses now

(We're not actually cancelling horses. Despite them being, objectively, expensive wastes of land & water, like private lawns, people's hearts just really reach out to horses. They're WORTH it, apparently, and when WE get rich, we'll have three, and...er...look it's DIFFERENT OK?)

(I mean, as someone who really loves horses: you can AlSO just get a bike & a tankful of guppies, donate a quarter of your monthly income to the ACLU and set up your home so you trip and fall a lot. Same rewards; much less wasteful, lots more social benefit, fewer guillotines.)

Time for some conclusions!
1. Plantcraft is a combination of geography, climate and intention.
2. To terraform a landscape, against its geography and climate, is absurd.
3. To do so with the intent of displaying private wealth is unethical.
3a. Unless it benefits horses.

4. When you have clarified the geography, climate and intention of your plantcraft, you seek The Best Plant For the Job.
5. For many Jobs, the Best Plant is Grass.
6. Grass is so Good at these Jobs that historically it has even been held communally, as common property.

7. Where it serves as a practical and self-sustaining groundcover in small spaces, any citizen may cultivate grass for their household without censure
8. To display, as private wealth, a grass common, because its role as a signifier of wealth/worth is that it is NOT a common: Bad

9. Going back to point 5, to reduce grass to "flooring," or to speak of it as an invasive immigrant, are both sides of the same coin, where we reduce everything to its utility and draw borders of keep/destroy, native/alien, human/nature, us/Environment.

9. (cont) the rest of these conclusions are mostly about themes of land and class justice, but point 9 is a good way to examine the colonial mindset, reconcile science/spirituality and EVEN Enjoy Your Life. Grass is your heritage, your home, your great-aunt. Bring respect to it.