A good scythe is faster then a weed-wacker but slower then a lawnmower. I have been using a scythe to cut my lawn for a few years now. It works, and is fun, but you must keep it VERY sharp. If the scythe is not razor sharp it will simply push the grass over instead of cutting it. A sickle will still work when somewhat dull, because it gathers the grass into the concave bit and/or you can hold on the grass with one hand and cut it with the other.
A scythe you have to sharpen every 5-10 min or so, normally you keep a scythe stone in your pocket to do this. The sickle you can just sharpen at the beginning of the day and that will be good enough.
The sharpening process takes some practice to get good at, particularly if you start peening it as well.
> The sharpening process takes some practice to get good at, particularly if you start peening it as well.
I wish someone invented an easier and safer way to sharpen a scythe. If you make an error, it's pretty easy to cut yourself pretty deeply, and even cut into finger joints (did it one time, cut was deep but so clean it healed essentially in a day). "Dull" scythe is still as sharp as your average knife. Sharp scythe is sharper than a razor.
I spent last year in an off-grid home and had to care for three acres of unmaintained pasture filled with patchy and matted fescue. I used nothing but a European-style scythe to do so. I actually wished I had had more pasture to care for because of how deeply satisfying and meaningful it was to do.
For example, it's one thing to have an idea of the Grim Reaper, but it's another to viscerally experience the reality of what a scythe does to grasses. Thousands of beings anonymously ended, their lives cut short.
it really does. I use a scythe for clearing high grass that I got from lee valley and hoped it would be a fun lawnmower alternative, but it was less satisfying than I had hoped. Maybe next season I'll get good at it, or buy a few more and and bus city people out to do scythercise classes.
This reminds me of economist E. F. Schumacher's idea of "intermediate technology." It's tech that is more advanced than an impoverished person's existing technology, but not so advanced that only a few can afford and use. Intermediate technology prevents a dual economy / neocolonialism where only a few people get rich and productive from using advanced labor-saving technology.
I wonder the tipping point for that status for the scythe occured historically. They are fairly difficult tools to manufacture, as far as hand tools go. And it wasn't that long ago, in the history of the tool, that a patent led to a single small site (by modern standards) exporting riveted English scythes all around the world.
> regions where sickles (or machetes) are traditionally used
I don't understand how it's possible that there are regions that don't use scythes (for crops that warrant them), when scythes have been around for over a thousand years?
I would venture to say that if they haven't transitioned yet it's because they don't want to (for whatever reasons--no idea what those might be).
* Scythes need to be sharp, a machete will work even when poorly maintained.
* Machetes are cheaper to make.
* Machetes are easier to use
* Scythes are a specialized tool, where as I can buy a machete for ten dollars at Canadian Tire. Economics of scale are different.
> There are still several remaining scythe factories in the world. In recent years a competitive, market-driven economy is making it difficult for scythe making factories to retain the quality level that was once a standard.
Invention and adoption of technology, even "basic" technology, is very contingent on circumstance. Bows are pretty near universal (but not quite), but specific improvements like recurved limbs are patchy. And people aren't exactly quick to adopt new farming techniques when a failure could mean they starve. I guess that's also why this organization is pushing uphill. But I think it's very possible that lots of people haven't heard of or seriously evaluated a scythe.
I mean it's an interesting idea, but it's weird to imagine that small time farmers in poor countries are capable of obtaining and using a sickle but are somehow not capable of obtaining and using a scythe.
At least looking for ones here in the US, a decent quality sickle seems to run in the $30-$60 range while places that sell scythes seem to cost $100-$300, so I can't imagine it's some massive price barrier either
Taking inspiration from your nickname, how do you explain the many technical aspects of Japan that are still stuck in the 90s? They surely know how to look around and they surely know better things have been battle tested for decades in other countries, and yet...
This is tangent, but I’m not in the US so my price perspective might be really different, but first of all that sounds really expensive.
Second of all, I can’t imagine any of my neighbours (live in countryside and have a lot of manual tools in shed) buying these things new. Far better to buy old ones for basically nothing at garage sales.
(I watch a lot of homesteading YouTube from US and am always amazed at how many power tools are purchased just for the one next job (or perhaps for the upcoming monetised video?). Power augers particularly. Far quicker and cheaper to just roll up sleeves than drive to town and back. It’s just a whole different view on consumption.)
I have spent a sizable portion of my time in developing nations.
There are deep rooted cultural differences that sometimes are counterintuitive to westerners.
One of the great strengths of some memetic frameworks is the easy and rapid adoption of processes and technologies that lower effort or raise efficiency.
As a result these cultures are also subject to rapid change on many fronts, and may become unrecognizable in just a few decades. These dynamic cultures thrive in name only, since they are not really the same memetic creature after a scant few generations.
As a note in the margin, the aforementioned, production oriented cultures often have a history of large scale wars, conquest and often colonization. War is a strong filter for valuing efficiency over other considerations.
Other memetic frameworks endure by virtue of valuing tradition and communal experience with past generations. These cultures change slowly, as their value structures resist change. This type of memetic symbiant has other kinds of value to humanity that are not measured in GDP or other economic metrics.
As an example, let me describe a common scenario that I have personally experienced multiple times:
Happening upon a person apparently having difficulty with a task, I show them a “better” way that stems from my cultural experiences. Usually, they are receptive and enthusiastic about the “new” way, which they themselves demonstrate as “better”.
Later, I may happen upon the same person doing the same task, in the “old” way. When I ask them why, they say something along the lines of “because it’s the way my father and his father did it”.
At first, I found this vexing. Now I understand that in these cultures, doing it in the “new” way was a fundamentally distinct action, which removed the meaning from the task. The original method was valued because it was communing with their family and heritage. The new method was effective but lacked a sense of meaning, effectively making it a hollow act in some way that I will probably never understand even though I can see.
Only when productivity is a goal unto itself is “progress” intrinsically valued. Not all cultures value productivity in the same way. In some cultures, being able to do something difficult at high proficiency is much more valued than being able to achieve the same outcome using a different method with much greater productivity.
This is visible in nearly all cultures in sport. Sport is typified by rules that make a trivial task difficult, and useful innovations using technology are typically frowned upon.
The skill of the difficult task is valued for its difficulty, as well as its ties to tradition and the way it is woven into the memetic tapestry.
As an oversimplified and caricatured example: Someone who can harvest a dozen animals in a day with a sling is a great hunter and respected provider. His brother that can do that in half an hour with his 22 rifle is a slacker who doesn’t respect his ancestors or the spirits of the forest.
I’m not trying to say that these cultures are retrograde or immune to progress. Rather they are not perpetually looking for new and better solutions with the same enthusiasm that some people might expect, and the innovators within their communities may encounter a degree of social friction that many people might find counterintuitive.
Adoption of new processes in these cultures often springs up but reverts to its prior state when even a minor friction to continuing adoption is encountered. The benefits often need to meet a surprisingly high bar for an innovation to be sticky.
I mean from a capitalist point of view, a farmer that uses scythes will outperform ones that use sickles (according to this website anyway). So there's something else going on.
The skill tree depends on awful lot on what you care about, and don't assume that western "high tech" solutions are the best, because they're the most complicated.
From a "Built out of locally available resources, with minimum energy, and robust repairability," it's hard to beat a scythe or other similar tool.
And I guarantee a well built scythe will still work, if tolerably cared for, long past the last of our over-complicated tractors rusting in fields because the right software to update the firmware to allow you to start the engine after changing the oil was trying to talk to some server that no longer exists...
Unless you're making this argument. I can't actually tell which way you're arguing for.
In terms of joules spent per blade of grass cut, a well honed scythe in the hands of a skillful operator is more efficient than mechanized solutions. If you have an area where you already have an abundance of agricultural workers, it might be that scythe is a better solution than having your agriculture sector being dependent on fossil fuels.
>What is the skill tree of development, and how do we speed run it?
There used to be an easy answer to this, now it's not politically or morally acceptable to support: colonization. Colonization is what brought modern farming practices (and their accompanying massive yields) as well as the development of the infrastructure needed to support it and other developments.
[+] [-] opwieurposiu|1 year ago|reply
A scythe you have to sharpen every 5-10 min or so, normally you keep a scythe stone in your pocket to do this. The sickle you can just sharpen at the beginning of the day and that will be good enough.
The sharpening process takes some practice to get good at, particularly if you start peening it as well.
https://scytheworks.ca/knowledge-base/chapter-4-preparing-th...
[+] [-] yetihehe|1 year ago|reply
I wish someone invented an easier and safer way to sharpen a scythe. If you make an error, it's pretty easy to cut yourself pretty deeply, and even cut into finger joints (did it one time, cut was deep but so clean it healed essentially in a day). "Dull" scythe is still as sharp as your average knife. Sharp scythe is sharper than a razor.
[+] [-] nataliste|1 year ago|reply
For example, it's one thing to have an idea of the Grim Reaper, but it's another to viscerally experience the reality of what a scythe does to grasses. Thousands of beings anonymously ended, their lives cut short.
[+] [-] motohagiography|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] lm28469|1 year ago|reply
It's also immensely more relaxing than the alternative, extremely sustainable and a pretty good workout
[+] [-] snitzr|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] tweetle_beetle|1 year ago|reply
https://www.sheffieldmuseums.org.uk/visit-us/abbeydale-indus...
https://scytheassociation.org/english-scythe-making-traditio...
[+] [-] wood_spirit|1 year ago|reply
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BZoKfap4g4w
[+] [-] insane_dreamer|1 year ago|reply
I don't understand how it's possible that there are regions that don't use scythes (for crops that warrant them), when scythes have been around for over a thousand years?
I would venture to say that if they haven't transitioned yet it's because they don't want to (for whatever reasons--no idea what those might be).
[+] [-] traverseda|1 year ago|reply
* Scythes need to be sharp, a machete will work even when poorly maintained.
* Machetes are cheaper to make.
* Machetes are easier to use
* Scythes are a specialized tool, where as I can buy a machete for ten dollars at Canadian Tire. Economics of scale are different.
> There are still several remaining scythe factories in the world. In recent years a competitive, market-driven economy is making it difficult for scythe making factories to retain the quality level that was once a standard.
https://scytheworks.ca/swwobs-blade-choice/
[+] [-] andrewflnr|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|1 year ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] HideousKojima|1 year ago|reply
At least looking for ones here in the US, a decent quality sickle seems to run in the $30-$60 range while places that sell scythes seem to cost $100-$300, so I can't imagine it's some massive price barrier either
[+] [-] burnte|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] Almondsetat|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] wood_spirit|1 year ago|reply
Second of all, I can’t imagine any of my neighbours (live in countryside and have a lot of manual tools in shed) buying these things new. Far better to buy old ones for basically nothing at garage sales.
(I watch a lot of homesteading YouTube from US and am always amazed at how many power tools are purchased just for the one next job (or perhaps for the upcoming monetised video?). Power augers particularly. Far quicker and cheaper to just roll up sleeves than drive to town and back. It’s just a whole different view on consumption.)
[+] [-] K0balt|1 year ago|reply
I have spent a sizable portion of my time in developing nations.
There are deep rooted cultural differences that sometimes are counterintuitive to westerners.
One of the great strengths of some memetic frameworks is the easy and rapid adoption of processes and technologies that lower effort or raise efficiency.
As a result these cultures are also subject to rapid change on many fronts, and may become unrecognizable in just a few decades. These dynamic cultures thrive in name only, since they are not really the same memetic creature after a scant few generations.
As a note in the margin, the aforementioned, production oriented cultures often have a history of large scale wars, conquest and often colonization. War is a strong filter for valuing efficiency over other considerations.
Other memetic frameworks endure by virtue of valuing tradition and communal experience with past generations. These cultures change slowly, as their value structures resist change. This type of memetic symbiant has other kinds of value to humanity that are not measured in GDP or other economic metrics.
As an example, let me describe a common scenario that I have personally experienced multiple times:
Happening upon a person apparently having difficulty with a task, I show them a “better” way that stems from my cultural experiences. Usually, they are receptive and enthusiastic about the “new” way, which they themselves demonstrate as “better”.
Later, I may happen upon the same person doing the same task, in the “old” way. When I ask them why, they say something along the lines of “because it’s the way my father and his father did it”.
At first, I found this vexing. Now I understand that in these cultures, doing it in the “new” way was a fundamentally distinct action, which removed the meaning from the task. The original method was valued because it was communing with their family and heritage. The new method was effective but lacked a sense of meaning, effectively making it a hollow act in some way that I will probably never understand even though I can see.
Only when productivity is a goal unto itself is “progress” intrinsically valued. Not all cultures value productivity in the same way. In some cultures, being able to do something difficult at high proficiency is much more valued than being able to achieve the same outcome using a different method with much greater productivity.
This is visible in nearly all cultures in sport. Sport is typified by rules that make a trivial task difficult, and useful innovations using technology are typically frowned upon.
The skill of the difficult task is valued for its difficulty, as well as its ties to tradition and the way it is woven into the memetic tapestry.
As an oversimplified and caricatured example: Someone who can harvest a dozen animals in a day with a sling is a great hunter and respected provider. His brother that can do that in half an hour with his 22 rifle is a slacker who doesn’t respect his ancestors or the spirits of the forest.
I’m not trying to say that these cultures are retrograde or immune to progress. Rather they are not perpetually looking for new and better solutions with the same enthusiasm that some people might expect, and the innovators within their communities may encounter a degree of social friction that many people might find counterintuitive.
Adoption of new processes in these cultures often springs up but reverts to its prior state when even a minor friction to continuing adoption is encountered. The benefits often need to meet a surprisingly high bar for an innovation to be sticky.
[+] [-] Cthulhu_|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] efm|1 year ago|reply
What is the skill tree of development, and how do we speed run it?
[+] [-] Syonyk|1 year ago|reply
From a "Built out of locally available resources, with minimum energy, and robust repairability," it's hard to beat a scythe or other similar tool.
And I guarantee a well built scythe will still work, if tolerably cared for, long past the last of our over-complicated tractors rusting in fields because the right software to update the firmware to allow you to start the engine after changing the oil was trying to talk to some server that no longer exists...
Unless you're making this argument. I can't actually tell which way you're arguing for.
[+] [-] vdupras|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] HideousKojima|1 year ago|reply
There used to be an easy answer to this, now it's not politically or morally acceptable to support: colonization. Colonization is what brought modern farming practices (and their accompanying massive yields) as well as the development of the infrastructure needed to support it and other developments.
[+] [-] unknown|1 year ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] dtquad|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|1 year ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] unknown|1 year ago|reply
[deleted]