I'm definitely in the 'rural suburban' camp, though more accurate would probably be 'rural in the shadow of a city'. I'm a bit of a hermit at heart, unfortunately; I don't shrivel in cities, per se, but I start to twitch in them in unhealthy ways, or at least such is my impression. Suburbia, while it has a peculiar sort of postmodern charm all its own, definitely has the soullessness that is its stereotype.
Ideally -- well, ideally for me -- I'd like to live somewhere that offers several acres of wooded land, somewhere where I might *have* neighbors but I'm not necessarily constantly reminded of them. Unfortunately, I have a few pretty powerful quirks that really want me to live within striking distance of a city; I might not want to live right upstairs from that wonderful market or right down the street from that great new hip-hop club, but I'd like to be able to head over to them at least once or twice a week, which means (more or less) a 30-40 mile radius of the city center.
Fortunately, most urban areas have something like this. If I were looking long-term at the SF Bay it'd probably be someplace like Boulder Creek or Fulton; up here it might be Snoqualmie/North Bend or Maple Valley. These are the towns that might sneak up towards 'suburban' eventually, but are liable to still have some fairly rural touches to them, for reasons of simple economics and geography -- nobody is going to be putting a Best Buy off of Highway 35 any time soon.
I suppose a lot of this comes down to upbringing; I spent my formative years in Wisconsin (briefly) and then upstate NY, the latter basically in the middle of nowhere surrounded by green mountains and some water, so green mountains and water are what I expect from the land around me; likewise, I grew up in a highly rural environment so I expect some measure of rurality -- I've just gotten used to the amenities of the city. I could go on and on about this, but it's late and I'm babbling, so I'll stop now; maybe later I'll try and journal up something about this topic, as it's one I've given quite a bit of thought to. Thank you for raising it!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
momijizukamori
no subject
Date: 2004-06-23 23:57 (UTC)Ideally -- well, ideally for me -- I'd like to live somewhere that offers several acres of wooded land, somewhere where I might *have* neighbors but I'm not necessarily constantly reminded of them. Unfortunately, I have a few pretty powerful quirks that really want me to live within striking distance of a city; I might not want to live right upstairs from that wonderful market or right down the street from that great new hip-hop club, but I'd like to be able to head over to them at least once or twice a week, which means (more or less) a 30-40 mile radius of the city center.
Fortunately, most urban areas have something like this. If I were looking long-term at the SF Bay it'd probably be someplace like Boulder Creek or Fulton; up here it might be Snoqualmie/North Bend or Maple Valley. These are the towns that might sneak up towards 'suburban' eventually, but are liable to still have some fairly rural touches to them, for reasons of simple economics and geography -- nobody is going to be putting a Best Buy off of Highway 35 any time soon.
I suppose a lot of this comes down to upbringing; I spent my formative years in Wisconsin (briefly) and then upstate NY, the latter basically in the middle of nowhere surrounded by green mountains and some water, so green mountains and water are what I expect from the land around me; likewise, I grew up in a highly rural environment so I expect some measure of rurality -- I've just gotten used to the amenities of the city. I could go on and on about this, but it's late and I'm babbling, so I'll stop now; maybe later I'll try and journal up something about this topic, as it's one I've given quite a bit of thought to. Thank you for raising it!