On “cottagecore” and those against it

You know, I’ve been thinking of this before, and now I thought about it again… I am really, really tired of those “disillusioning cottagecore” posts.

I mean yes, a lot of cottagecore is taking it to far—it’s the same with all aesthetics and trends on tumblr, that things that are just supposed to be fun and games and pretty to look at are taken a little to seriously, both by the people who like them, and by the people who dislike them, and people actually worry about “practising” their aesthetic enough, etc.

But for the most part, the general approach and point of very basic “cottagecore” is neither unrealistic, nor difficult, and also not bad.

I don’t know why, but there’s so many spoilsports on here claim that there is little no alternative to either living in a skyscraper in a huge city, or all alone in the wild, with no other human being within reach of an hour’s drive. I suppose that’s largely an American thing, but even for America it’s an overexaggeration.

The simply term cottagecore implies that the distant wild is not even meant. It’s about a rather simple life, in a small house, with a garden, maybe a few plants and animals, etc. in smaller town or village. That’s reasonable, that’s often (again, depends on the region) more affordable than living in a big city, and it has nothing to do with the challenges of either large-scale commercial farming or suddenly becoming a pseudo-pioneer hermit. And many, many people live like that their normal everyday life, without ever even having heard the word “cottagecore”. It is entirely normal. It’s a normal thing normal people do.

You don’t have to get up at 4am in the morning. There’s other people, even shops and restaurants, if not in your place, than in one nearby. You’re not likely to get hunted by large wild animals your backgarden. Seriously. You’d do your work, go grocery shopping (but maybe need less things from the store), get to go on walks in the nearby area, take care of whatever animals or plants you choose to adopt. It wouldn’t an ideal cutesy fairy tale life. No. But city life isn’t as glamurous as it is shown on tv—everything has its ups and downs, and it largely depends on personal preference for a person to feel comfortable in a place.

There are, of course, regional differences. Depending on the country or province you live in, if you’d actually wanted to move out into the countryside, it could be difficult to find actually smaller towns and villages or similar settlements, and I am not denying that. I know there are many places where there’s really little “in-between” cities and wilderness. But that doesn’t make a preference for, or an interest in rural living somehow invalid.

Nobody who likes the idea of living in a rural area, or leading a simple life, or having a garden and some pets, maybe even small livestock, and nobody who considers actually doing that, is somehow proven unrealistic and deserves to have all their dreams shattered, just because some grouches on tumblr keep insisting that the only alternatives to a fast-paced metropolitan live were moving out into the prairie and living entirely off what you find in nature, or else owning a million-dollar factory farm.

Villages exist. Small towns exist. Small houses with gardens exist. Small farms exist. Not exactly everywhere, and also not for everyone. But it is a comparably realistic and archieveable dream, or goal, or interest, whatever you may call it. It’s not precisely cottagecore, but you also wouldn’t say that, just because they are not precisely dark/light academia, that universities, and libraries and museums don’t exist or couldn’t be attended/visited, would you?