Category: How to Live

  • Wandering in Place

    Wandering in Place

    For most of the last decade, I assumed the direction of my life had a natural progression. I am a farmer, and although the details were sometimes hazy, having my own farm one day seemed like the ideal destination. I spent years building the skills I thought I would need: vegetable production, irrigation, hoop houses, equipment, crop planning, organic certification, record keeping, marketing, grants, and all the less glamorous systems that keep a small farm functioning.

    There is a line from Wendell Berry’s The Unsettling of America that has stuck with me for years:

    “No farther. This is the place.”

    I’ve always found that idea deeply appealing: to stop looking perpetually over the horizon, choose a place, learn it deeply, take responsibility for it, and build a life there.

    And right now I’m doing almost exactly the opposite.

    After spending months moving between farms in Japan, Korea, and Taiwan, I’m less certain than I’ve ever been that owning my own farm is what I actually want.

    That creates some conflict for me, because I haven’t fallen out of love with farming. I haven’t even stopped farming. If anything, I’m more certain that agriculture needs to remain a major part of my life.

    What I’m less certain about is whether being a farmer necessarily means putting down roots on one farm.

    WWOOFing Has Shown Me Another Version of Agricultural Life

    One of the unexpected pleasures of WWOOFing has been entering a farm, becoming useful relatively quickly, learning how the operation works, contributing something, and eventually moving on. That is obviously very different from building a relationship with one piece of land over twenty years, but it has its own appeal.

    Over the last several months, I’ve worked with unfamiliar crops, tools, climates, and production systems. I’ve lived with farm families, watched similar problems get solved in very different ways, taught techniques I already knew, and learned things I had never encountered before. Agriculture has become the thread connecting travel, cultural exchange, language study, and ordinary daily life.

    I like being experienced enough to contribute while still being new enough to pay attention. There is something energizing about walking onto a new farm and trying to understand it. Where does the water come from? What is limiting production? Which jobs consume too much labor? What keeps breaking? What does this farmer care about? What are they unusually good at?

    I find myself constantly asking what I can learn and where I can help. That curiosity may be telling me something about the kind of agricultural life that suits me.

    Rethinking How I Contribute

    I’ve always valued autonomy, and part of wanting my own farm was wanting control over my work. But I’m realizing that autonomy doesn’t necessarily require controlling an entire operation. What I seem to enjoy most is having enough experience and independence to solve meaningful problems.

    Sometimes that means helping redesign an irrigation system or improve a workflow. Sometimes it means building a hoop house, troubleshooting equipment, helping a beginning farmer think through a production problem, writing a grant, or building a spreadsheet or website that saves somebody time. Those things can look unrelated from the outside, but to me they all feel like variations of the same work: understanding a problem and making the farm function better.

    For a while, I thought of consulting and technical work as things I might do to support farming financially. I’m beginning to think that may be backwards. Perhaps those things are themselves ways of participating in agriculture.

    My background now combines farming, software development, infrastructure, organic certification, grants, websites, mentoring, and international farm experience. Put together, they suggest a role I find increasingly interesting: someone farmers can call when there is a messy problem that doesn’t fit neatly into one category.

    I think I care more about being useful than being in charge.

    And if I can help several farms solve meaningful problems without carrying every responsibility of owning one myself, I’m no longer sure I should see that as something secondary to “real” farming.

    The Part Berry Makes Difficult

    This is where I can’t completely dismiss that line: “No farther. This is the place.”

    There are things movement simply cannot give me.

    I can arrive at a farm and understand a lot fairly quickly, but I don’t know that place the way somebody knows it after twenty seasons. I didn’t build the soil. I don’t remember when that tree was planted or what happened in that field ten years ago. I won’t necessarily be there to find out whether a decision that looks good today still looks good five years from now.

    Farming rewards staying. Over time you learn where water sits after a storm, where certain weeds always return, which ground warms first in spring, and how the soil responds to years of management. Eventually the place carries a history that includes you.

    There is a depth of knowledge—and responsibility—that only comes from remaining somewhere long enough to acquire it. That matters to me.

    I also don’t want to turn mobility into another version of constantly believing that whatever is over the next hill must be better. There will always be another country, another farm, another language, another interesting person, and another possibility. At some point, choosing one thing means giving up the others.

    That is the part of Berry’s argument that bothers me in a productive way. I can see the value of being deeply rooted precisely because I am currently enjoying the opposite.

    But I’m Not Ready to Stop Moving Yet

    At the same time, I like what movement is giving me right now. More specifically, I like living temporarily in rural places.

    I like staying somewhere long enough to develop routines instead of simply passing through. I like working with people, eating with families, hearing their stories, learning bits of language, and seeing how agriculture changes with climate, cuisine, labor, and culture. I like being shown places that would never appear on a tourist itinerary and slowly becoming useful somewhere that was completely unfamiliar a few weeks earlier.

    Importantly, I’m not sacrificing farming to do those things. The farming is what makes much of it possible.

    That has been a major change in how I think about my future. I used to imagine mobility and farming as competing desires, but over the last several months I’ve discovered that they don’t necessarily have to be. A farm of my own would give me roots; this life lets me keep farming while moving between places, people, cultures, and agricultural systems.

    Right now, I’m not ready to trade that for permanence.

    There may be a version of my life that moves seasonally between different kinds of work: an intensive period on a farm, a stretch of consulting or technical work, some time abroad, and then another growing season somewhere else.

    A few years ago, that would have sounded unfocused to me.

    Now it sounds increasingly coherent.

    I Haven’t Given Up on the Farm

    None of this means I’ve decided that I will never own land.

    I still imagine it sometimes: a small place with good soil, enough infrastructure to work efficiently, a greenhouse, a workshop, and maybe an acre or two of serious production. I still want the experience of knowing one piece of land deeply and watching the consequences of my decisions accumulate over years.

    What has changed is that I no longer need that image to be the inevitable conclusion of my life as a farmer.

    I don’t need my name on the deed to prove that I became a “real” farmer. I already am one.

    If my future involves helping ten farms instead of owning one, I’m starting to think that could be just as legitimate. Maybe even more interesting, at least for me.

    The Dream Changed Shape

    For a long time, I thought owning a farm was the destination.

    Now I’m starting to think farming may be the constant while the form around it changes.

    I still want agriculture, rural communities, physical work, and meaningful problems in my life. I want enough independence to choose work I believe matters, and I want to keep learning from people who farm differently than I do. At least for now, I also want enough freedom to keep moving.

    Maybe someday I’ll reach a place and know:

    No farther. This is the place.

    I’m just not there yet.

  • Land as a Doorway

    Land as a Doorway

    I have spent more than a decade farming, so when I tell people that I’m traveling through Asia by living and working on farms, there is an obvious question: Why?

    I’m not doing it because I need someone to teach me how to weed a row, transplant seedlings, run irrigation, harvest vegetables, or survive a long day outside. I already know how to farm.

    That turns out not to be the point.

    What keeps me coming back to farms is that agriculture gives me a way into something I care about even more than agricultural technique: the life of a place.

    Working Changes How I See a Place

    Despite my Las Vegas roots, I prefer the country. Cities can be interesting, but I don’t really want to spend months moving from landmark to landmark, sleeping in hotels, eating every meal in a restaurant, and observing a place from the outside.

    I want to know what ordinary life feels like. Working on a farm changes the way I enter a place. I’m not only looking at the landscape; I’m participating in it.

    I start learning where the water comes from, what grows well, what the weather does, when people eat, how the workday is structured, which jobs everyone hates, and what has to get done before rain. I learn which roads farmers actually use, where supplies come from, which crops matter locally, and how much of rural life revolves around things tourists rarely notice. The landscape stops being scenery and becomes something people are working with every day.

    Food Begins With Place

    Part of my attraction to agriculture is that it sits very close to the root of settled life.

    Human culture existed long before farming, of course. But once people began producing enough food to support large, specialized societies, agriculture became deeply entangled with almost everything that followed: towns, trade, religion, craft, politics, cuisine, and eventually the modern industries that seem completely removed from a field.

    You can still see those connections when you spend time on farms.

    The crops tell you what people eat, and the food reflects climate, preservation, history, and taste. Machinery tells you something about labor, while the size of farms reveals something about the availability and value of land. Even the age of the people doing the work can tell you something about what is happening to rural communities.

    In Korea, vast fields of peppers make more sense after seeing how deeply gochugaru runs through Korean cuisine. Soybean fields make more sense when you see the jars of doenjang and ganjang made from them. In Japan, crops I might have treated as ordinary vegetables became tied to specific dishes, seasons, and ways of preserving food.

    A crop plan is never only agronomy. It is also culture.

    Work Gives Me a Role

    There is a big difference between visiting someone and working beside them.

    As a tourist, I’m mostly a customer. I arrive, consume something, pay, and leave.

    When I arrive at a farm to work, I’m still a guest, but I also have a role. I can harvest, weed, seed trays, pack produce, fix something, move materials, wash vegetables, or simply help finish whatever needs to be done that day.

    Because I already have years of farming experience, I can usually become useful fairly quickly.

    That changes the relationship.

    Conversations happen naturally while working. People explain why they do things a certain way. They complain when something isn’t working. They joke, tell stories, and ask how I would do the same job back home. Sometimes I can offer something useful from my own experience in return.

    After enough days of working and eating together, the relationship starts feeling different from simply being hosted somewhere.

    You stop being only the foreigner passing through.

    You become, at least temporarily, part of daily life.

    And that is when a place starts opening up.

    The Land Leads Somewhere Else

    One of the things I value most about this way of traveling is how often the farm opens the door to everything around it.

    A host tells me which restaurant is actually worth eating at. Someone recommends a mountain or a stream. I’m invited to a family meal, a festival, a temple, a market, or a gathering with childhood friends. A place I never would have found in an English-language travel guide becomes one of the things I remember most.

    Language works the same way. When you live and work with people, you hear the same expressions over and over—not just formal language, but instructions, jokes, complaints, filler words, family conversations, and local pronunciation.

    In Japan, where I had already spent a lot of time studying Japanese, farm work gave the language context. Words stopped being vocabulary cards and became attached to tools, vegetables, meals, weather, mistakes, and people.

    Even in places where I know much less of the language, being around ordinary conversation changes how I experience it. A host becomes an informal cultural interpreter. I can ask what something means, what I should eat, why people do something a certain way, or whether a place is actually worth visiting.

    Google Maps has never told me, “My childhood friends are going to the stream this weekend. Come with us.”

    And once those relationships start leading outward, the days can go in directions I never would have planned. Farm work has led to karate, mountain hikes, racetracks, night markets, streams, temples, and being naked in a hot spring with a bunch of Japanese uncles.

    That unpredictability is part of the appeal. I don’t want every part of travel optimized in advance. Some of the experiences I remember most happened because I was already connected to someone who belonged there and was willing to say yes when the day went somewhere unexpected.

    Land as a Doorway

    Agriculture gives me a way into places I probably would never understand as deeply from a hotel room. The work gives me a reason to stay, and farming gives me something in common with the people around me. From there come the meals, conversations, friendships, language, local knowledge, and strange adventures I never could have planned in advance.

    Agriculture even provides a kind of common language when the spoken one fails. I may not know how to say very much, but I understand the urgency when rain is coming and something needs to be harvested. I understand a broken irrigation line, a weedy field, a heavy box, and the satisfaction of finishing a job before dinner.

    I already knew how to farm before I started working on farms across Asia. What I didn’t know was where farming would take me.

    The land is the doorway. What I’m really trying to understand is the life that opens up when I pass through it.

  • Indra’s Net in a Korean Field

    Indra’s Net in a Korean Field

    By the time I arrived at Gucheungam Hermitage at Hwaeomsa, I had already spent almost a decade farming in the United States and nearly six months working on farms in Japan and Korea. That experience had given me a habit that is difficult to turn off. Why this tool? Why this crop? Why is this planted here? Why are we doing this by hand? Could this be faster? Put me in front of a weedy field and I’ll quickly find a way to clear the place.

    At Gucheungam, much of the weeding was being done with short hand hoes while sitting on small stools. I eventually found an old long-handled hoe, sharpened it, and started working standing up. The result wasn’t as meticulous, but I could kill most of the weeds in a fraction of the time, rake up the larger ones, and move on.

    Other people noticed, and more long-handled hoes started appearing. At one point I overheard someone call it the “Tyler method,” which was funny considering I had not, in fact, invented hoeing. My first instinct was simple: this was a better tool for the job, and I still think it was.

    But the longer I worked in Korea, the more I found myself looking beyond the task itself. A tool, a crop, a field, even the pace of a workday seemed to reflect something larger around it.

    A Net Around the Field

    Hwaeomsa takes its name from the Korean Hwaeom Buddhist tradition. One image associated with that tradition is Indra’s Net.

    Imagine an enormous net stretching endlessly in every direction, with a jewel hanging at every intersection. Each jewel reflects every other jewel in the net. Within each reflection, the other jewels appear again, each reflecting all the others in turn. No single jewel stands completely on its own. Look closely enough at one part and the rest of the net appears inside it.

    I’m not qualified to turn that into a lesson about Buddhist philosophy, but as a farmer, the image immediately appealed to me. The longer I worked in Korea, the more agriculture began to resemble it.

    A farming practice can appear to be an isolated decision: this crop, this tool, this field layout, this way of weeding. But look closely and the things around it begin to appear. Climate influences the crop. Cuisine shapes the market. Labor affects the tools. Land prices shape the size of the farm. History, family, government policy, and habit all leave their marks.

    The physical work was usually the easiest part for me to recognize. What interested me more was everything reflected inside it.

    A Pepper Field Is a Jewel

    At Yosebi Farm in Gangwon-do, much of our work involved peppers and corn. We harvested, packed large orders, worked in greenhouses, cleared weeds, and seeded trays of cabbage destined for kimchi. The work itself was familiar. Crops still had to be harvested, weeds still got ahead of us, weather still changed the plan, and somehow too much produce always seemed to become ready at once.

    What was different was everything around the work. After seeing how deeply gochugaru runs through Korean cuisine, vast fields of peppers made more sense. After seeing jars of doenjang and ganjang aging on farms, soybean fields looked different. Trays of kimchi cabbage were connected to a very specific food culture waiting at the other end.

    A crop plan reflects agronomy, but it also reflects what people expect to find on the dinner table. The pepper field and the kitchen were not separate subjects. One was reflected in the other.

    That sounds obvious when written down, but it becomes much more tangible when you spend your morning harvesting a crop and your evening eating the reason it was planted.

    The Net Reaches Beyond the Farm

    Peace Tree Farm made that idea harder to ignore in a different way. Its history was tied to Korea’s organic farming movement, but what I experienced there was never simply an agricultural operation. It was also a home and a multigenerational family. Work, meals, children, grandchildren, visitors, and ordinary household life overlapped until it became difficult to say exactly where the farm ended and the rest of life began.

    Won was a master of hospitality. Rather than feeling like someone who had simply arrived to exchange labor for food and a place to sleep, I gradually felt folded into the household. Meals stretched into conversation, people came and went, and the farm became inseparable from the family living on it. Agriculture was still at the center, but it was only one part of a much larger web of relationships.

    One day, Won and Kim-seonsaengnim took me to the White Horse Ridge battleground near the DMZ. It was the kind of place I probably never would have sought out on my own. Through binoculars I could see North Korean flags in the distance, while nearby, areas behind barbed wire marked ground that might still contain mines left from the Korean War.

    People were farming there.

    Farmers pass through checkpoints to reach fields in a landscape where the consequences of a war fought generations ago are still physically present. Standing there made it difficult to think about agricultural land only in terms of soil, irrigation, labor, yield, and profit.

    A field can be all of those things while also sitting inside a war. The same piece of ground can be shaped by military borders, government policy, family history, land ownership, markets, and events that happened before the current farmer was born.

    Even my own presence there was part of the net. I was standing near the DMZ because I had come to work on a farm, become close to the people living there, and been invited into a part of their world I otherwise would never have seen.

    The field boundary is not where the system ends.

    Seeing the Net Doesn’t Mean Accepting Everything

    There is a danger in taking the metaphor too far. Seeing the relationships around a practice does not mean deciding that every practice is good.

    That distinction matters to me because I still evaluate work almost automatically. Years on a small vegetable farm taught me to notice wasted movement, unnecessary labor, bad tools, and jobs that have become inefficient simply because nobody has stopped to question them. My background in software probably strengthened that tendency rather than weakening it.

    The long-handled hoe at Gucheungam is a good example. I can understand that the short hoes and stools belonged to a particular way of working and still believe that, for clearing a large area, the long-handled hoe was better. Those ideas are not contradictory.

    A practice can be deeply embedded in a web of history, habit, labor, and expectation and still be inefficient. Sometimes there is an important reason for doing something differently. Sometimes there is simply a better tool leaning against the wall.

    Seeing the net does not require surrendering judgment. It just means understanding more of what I am judging.

    Faster for What?

    Gucheungam complicated another part of the net: my own instinct toward efficiency.

    On a commercial farm, I think efficiency matters enormously. Labor costs money, crops do not wait, and a task that takes twice as long as necessary eventually creates problems somewhere else in the operation. That way of thinking had been ingrained in me by years of vegetable production, and I carried it with me everywhere.

    At the hermitage, though, the day moved according to a different rhythm. Every day included a rice-offering prayer to the Buddha that lasted around forty-five minutes, sometimes longer. Huge temple bells sounded across the grounds in the morning, at midday, and again in the evening. Meals, ceremonies, visitors, conversations, tea, weather, and work all occupied their own space in the day.

    The weeds still needed to be cleared. Bamboo still needed to be cut back from tea trees that had been growing there for generations. There was plenty of physical work. But the day was not arranged around squeezing the maximum amount of production from every hour.

    I had shaved my beard before arriving and, with my already shaved head, kept getting mistaken for a monk. After about a month there, I was certain I was still more farmer than monk. Put me in front of enough weeds and I will eventually start calculating how quickly we can get through them.

    But at Gucheungam, efficiency was only one value among many. Clearing the weeds faster did not make the prayer shorter, the bell ring sooner, or the meal arrive earlier. The work existed inside the rhythm of the place rather than dictating that rhythm itself.

    That left me with a question I still think is useful: Faster for what?

    Even my desire for efficiency was not some neutral standard floating above everything else. It had its own place in the net. It reflected the commercial farm where I learned to work, the limitations of labor and money there, my background in software, and probably something about my personality as well.

    I wasn’t standing outside the system evaluating it. I was bringing my own system with me.

    Seeing the Whole Net

    Three months in Korea did not overturn the way I think about farming. I still believe good tools matter enormously, labor efficiency deserves serious attention, and simple systems often outperform complicated ones. I also still have a hard time watching people repeat an unnecessary problem without wanting to fix it.

    What changed was what I noticed around those problems.

    When I arrived in Korea, I tended to look closely at individual practices. By the time I left, I was paying much more attention to what they reflected. The pepper field reflected the kitchen. The field near the DMZ reflected a war. Peace Tree reflected a family, a history, and a movement in Korean agriculture. The hoe reflected assumptions about labor and what a finished job should look like. The pace of Gucheungam reflected prayer, community, and a purpose that could not be measured only in output per hour.

    Even my own instinct toward efficiency reflected the farm where I learned to work.

    None of those things existed alone.

    That may be what I like most about Indra’s Net as a way of thinking about agriculture. The metaphor is more interesting than simply saying that everything is connected. Look closely enough at one thing and you begin to see the others reflected inside it. A pepper field contains a cuisine. A field near the DMZ contains a war. A tool contains assumptions about labor. A workday contains ideas about what the day is for.

    The same is true anywhere, not only in Korea. Every farm is sitting inside a much larger system of food, land, history, economics, family, culture, and place. The farm may be where those forces become visible, but they do not begin or end at the edge of the field.

    A field is never only a field.