I grew up on the outskirts of Edmonds, Washington,
which was rural at the time. I have no doubt that
younger people in this area would scoff at the
idea that where I grew up was ever rural; it is
now quite decidedly suburbia.

But, in fact, in my immediate neighborhood were
forests, fields, swamps, streams, and ponds. And
as Edmonds is on the shore of Puget Sound, a very
large body of salt water was not far off.

I have seen many comedies in which city or country
folk are transplanted to the opposite of where
they grew up. City folk are often portrayed as
being frightened or disgusted by nature, and
country folk are often portrayed as being dumb
rubes who are dazzled by city life.

In my experience, both of these stereotypes are
true. I have met many squeamish city folk, and I
am certainly bedazzled and a little intimidated by
large urban areas.

I currently live in a fairly remote area. I have
to drive for about 40 minutes to get to town, and
it is a pretty small town. When I go out on my
deck in the morning to drink my coffee, there are
very tall trees in any direction I care to look.
And they are clustered quite densely, rather like
an extremely tall hedge. I can pretty much only
see trees and sky. And I quite like this.

I realize there are many city people out there to
whom this would be horrible. I, in turn, think
being surrounded by skyscrapers and cement would
be equally horrible. However, I will concede that
neither is "wrong," and it all comes down to how
and where you grew up. So, what I am asking
is which do you prefer, and why?

Kelly