Saturday essay: Fall's frustration
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Friday, Oct. 18, 2013, 8:57 p.m.
In many locales this year, fall's glory seemed to fizzle rather than pop. Spots of color, in a few cases brilliant, appeared here and there. Then in short order, those manifestations of the changing seasons began to flutter to the ground, gradually but surely piling up.
It's an injustice that the majesty of fall passed so quickly, transitioning into what for many will be weeks of collecting, composting or otherwise cursing the fallen leaves. As memory serves, this year's cleanup began much earlier than in previous years, as if an impatient winter were trying to cheat fall out of its full stay. And that truly would be an injustice.
Whether you rake 'em, mulch 'em, bag 'em, blow 'em or collect 'em in a big tarp for disposal elsewhere, the fallen leaves combine for a joyless task. They fall on their own schedule, not yours. And after you rake and pile and collect them, your property will look just as cluttered within 24 hours from the time you put down the rake.
The alternative, of course, is to wait for all the leaves to come down and deal with that compounded mess in one long cleanup. But even that is no sure bet. On my property there's a stubborn oak, a holdout, that each year retains its leaves for weeks after all the other trees have shed theirs.
“Every leaf speaks bliss to me, fluttering from the autumn tree,” wrote English novelist and poet Emily Bronte. Obviously in the aftermath of fall's grandeur, she never spent hours on end raking leaves.
— Bob Pellegrino
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Another IPCC warning: More sci-fi
- The Nevada standoff
- The Obama/Biden visit: Oh, the irony
- Sunday pops
- Paying the ObamaCare premium
- The problem with BNY Mellon: It wears blinders