Natural thoughts: A naturalist in the city
I work in a large and urban forest preserve system that surrounds most of the city of Chicago. When I ask my coworkers where they are from or where they live, unsurprisingly they come from places outside of the city where there is more open space and less congestion and noise than in the heart of the city. "I really don't like big cities." says one of the naturalists I work with at a south-suburban nature center operated by the forest preserves. "I'll sometimes go into the city for a conference or an event, but otherwise my wife and I stay out of the city."
"Woa, you're RIGHT IN the city, then!" says another coworker during a meeting when I tell her where I am living. "Yep," I reply sheepishly.
I don't blame my coworkers for avoiding the city. Obviously, Chicago is not a well suited environment for naturalists who enjoy pristine green space and peace and quiet. Yet I am always someone who has enjoyed the conveniences of city living and the peacefulness of more remote areas.
Chicago is different, though. In other big cities I've lived in, such as Pittsburgh or Washington, DC, it is possible for me to sip an expensive latte at a trendy cafe one moment while the next I can take a hike down a wooded path with a view of a waterfall. That's because other cities I've lived in have an unusual blending of nature and urbanness that seem to offer the best of both worlds (see figure 1). Chicago, on the other hand, is situated on flat and glaciated terrain that has a much more urban and industrial aesthetic not unlike most Mid-West cities (figure 2).
But I guess for now I'll be in the minority. I prefer living in the city. I hope my feet don't become too sore from all of the concrete that they must cross...
"Woa, you're RIGHT IN the city, then!" says another coworker during a meeting when I tell her where I am living. "Yep," I reply sheepishly.
I don't blame my coworkers for avoiding the city. Obviously, Chicago is not a well suited environment for naturalists who enjoy pristine green space and peace and quiet. Yet I am always someone who has enjoyed the conveniences of city living and the peacefulness of more remote areas.
Chicago is different, though. In other big cities I've lived in, such as Pittsburgh or Washington, DC, it is possible for me to sip an expensive latte at a trendy cafe one moment while the next I can take a hike down a wooded path with a view of a waterfall. That's because other cities I've lived in have an unusual blending of nature and urbanness that seem to offer the best of both worlds (see figure 1). Chicago, on the other hand, is situated on flat and glaciated terrain that has a much more urban and industrial aesthetic not unlike most Mid-West cities (figure 2).
But I guess for now I'll be in the minority. I prefer living in the city. I hope my feet don't become too sore from all of the concrete that they must cross...
Figure 3: A wintery scene of the Oakland neighborhood of Pittsburgh, PA., offering a blend of naturally wooded hillsides and cityscapes. Photo by Andrii Cherniak. |
Comments
Post a Comment