Saturday, January 24, 2015

The spirits of Shenandoah National Park

The spirits of Shenandoah National Park

 

Wandering off-trail in Shenandoah National Park
 
  For much of the year, Shenandoah National Park is a gorgeously overgrown place. The underbrush sneaks over the trails, threatening to erase them. Off-trail, the views are densely wooded in every direction, tangled in Virginia creeper and prickly greenbrier.
This is why we have come in December, to search for things that are obscured when the park’s hollows and hillsides are green. Winter, my friend Sue Eisenfeld says, is bushwhacking season. This is when we might wander off-trail in the backcountry, discover concealed relics and still find our way back.
We are hunting for Aaron Nicholson’s home, or whatever remains of it. When the state of Virginia assembled Shenandoah National Park in the early 1930s out of a patchwork of privately owned land, Nicholson’s descendants were paid $783 for their 20-acre property here. Park records say the family had a 15-by-43-foot log home, a sizable barn, two outbuildings and an acre of orchards.



On a 1929 U.S. Geological Survey map, a black dot the size of a pinpoint seems to indicate that Nicholson lived right next to the Hughes River. So we are poking along the riverbank, a two-mile hike down from Skyline Drive, in a part of the park that is considered “wilderness.”
Bushwhacking is a comically inelegant exercise. Eisenfeld and I have to hike with our whole bodies, swinging our legs over fallen logs and flailing our arms to keep the thorns at bay. At least once, a low-hanging limb latches onto my backpack. Eventually, though, as our map promised, the homesite comes into view: a solitary, towering stone chimney in a forest of naked trees.
 The men charged with creating the park had to revise their ambitions, from 521,000 acres to, eventually, about 176,000. The reality of property values and private protest redrew the park’s boundaries into the jagged lines they are today. Still, more than 2,000 people lived within the planned final park borders. Faced with the prospect of negotiating with all of them, Virginia passed a law in 1928 allowing it to claim their land through eminent domain instead.
 
January 10
For much of the year, Shenandoah National Park is a gorgeously overgrown place. The underbrush sneaks over the trails, threatening to erase them. Off-trail, the views are densely wooded in every direction, tangled in Virginia creeper and prickly greenbrier.
This is why we have come in December, to search for things that are obscured when the park’s hollows and hillsides are green. Winter, my friend Sue Eisenfeld says, is bushwhacking season. This is when we might wander off-trail in the backcountry, discover concealed relics and still find our way back.
We are hunting for Aaron Nicholson’s home, or whatever remains of it. When the state of Virginia assembled Shenandoah National Park in the early 1930s out of a patchwork of privately owned land, Nicholson’s descendants were paid $783 for their 20-acre property here. Park records say the family had a 15-by-43-foot log home, a sizable barn, two outbuildings and an acre of orchards.
On a 1929 U.S. Geological Survey map, a black dot the size of a pinpoint seems to indicate that Nicholson lived right next to the Hughes River. So we are poking along the riverbank, a two-mile hike down from Skyline Drive, in a part of the park that is considered “wilderness.”
Bushwhacking is a comically inelegant exercise. Eisenfeld and I have to hike with our whole bodies, swinging our legs over fallen logs and flailing our arms to keep the thorns at bay. At least once, a low-hanging limb latches onto my backpack. Eventually, though, as our map promised, the homesite comes into view: a solitary, towering stone chimney in a forest of naked trees.
Aaron Nicholson owned a log home, barn, outbuildings and orchard in what is now the park. Above, Russ Nicholson, Aaron’s son, peels apples in October 1935. (Courtesy of Arthur Rothstein/Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division)
The chimney that remains of Aaron Nicholson's home in Shenandoah National Park. Nature has reclaimed many structures in the park. (Emily Badger/The Washington Post)
Most of Shenandoah is so wild and overgrown that it is easy to imagine that it was always that way. The park, about two hours west of the District, draws 1.2 million visitors a year for scenic overlooks off Skyline Drive or day trips on the Appalachian Trail through scenes that seem as untouched by man as any place we have in the Mid-Atlantic. Running along a ridgeline, the park seems far removed from development in the valley below.
But, as Eisenfeld writes in a new book that is part history, part hiking ode, this park has in fact been “de-peopled and re-wilded.” To create this vast expanse of nature, hundreds of families who lived and farmed here, who grew orchards and grazed livestock here, had to leave.
The park’s records do not indicate whether the Nicholson family willingly sold its homestead. Eighty years later, the fragments that remain easily blend into the forest. The few surviving fence posts were made out of trees that once grew here. The chimney, about 30 feet high, is stacked of the same light-colored granite-gneiss found throughout these hills.
Eisenfeld brought me here after I had read her book, “Shenandoah: A Story of Conservation and Betrayal,” which will be published next month by the University of Nebraska Press. Like her, I had hiked in this park for years, unaware of its history and the evidence of it that still lingers throughout. But, she says as we walk, “once you start seeing this, you see it everywhere.”
All around us are large rock piles, stacked decades ago by farmers picking over their fields. Stone walls suddenly visible from the trails mark boundary lines and fences that are no longer needed. The trails we walk, according to our old map, were roads connecting families here long before they became hiking paths for nature-lovers from the city.
Even the forest itself bears signs of the communities that once existed here. On land cleared years ago for pasture or farming, tulip poplars dominate the regrown forest; oaks and hickories haven’t had time to come back yet. Neil, Eisenfeld’s husband and a trained naturalist, can spot a former farm site by this forest succession.
Learn this history, and you begin to see Shenandoah in a new light: as a place that was once far from wild, that was lived in, from which families — if not all the signs of their former lives — had to be removed.
In the early 20th century, the United States already had several great national parks — Yosemite, Yellowstone, Glacier — all in the West. Advocates wanted a comparable park for the East Coast, where it would be accessible to more of the nation’s population.
Several states bid for the honor; the Virginia boosters who wanted a national park here promised that the land they had in mind was “pristine and uninhabited.” Businessman George Pollock led the push for about half a million acres that happened to surround his own Skyland resort in the Blue Ridge. “There are within the area, of course, a few small mountain farms,” he wrote to a committee considering the park, “of no great value.”
Congress authorized the creation of a park here in 1926, if Virginia could cobble together the land and donate it to the federal government. No one foresaw that the people who lived here would object.
When surveyors first appraised the area imagined for the park, they found 5,650 tracts of land and 3,250 homes, involving far more people than the state had expected and a far higher sum than it could afford to pay. Many of the families the surveyors encountered also relayed word that they did not want to sell.
The men charged with creating the park had to revise their ambitions, from 521,000 acres to, eventually, about 176,000. The reality of property values and private protest redrew the park’s boundaries into the jagged lines they are today. Still, more than 2,000 people lived within the planned final park borders. Faced with the prospect of negotiating with all of them, Virginia passed a law in 1928 allowing it to claim their land through eminent domain instead.
Some families took the money willingly. For the next decade, others tried to appeal their appraisals and even their fates, all the way to the Supreme Court. In the end, several dozen people were given lifetime residency in the park. Most, though, had to leave — the last of them through eviction in the late 1930s, their homes locked behind them or destroyed.
This is the cost some people paid for what we consider today to be conservation.
For decades, the story the park told of itself made little mention of these families. Or, worse, the prevailing history described the “hollow folk” who lived here as hillbillies who spoiled the land with grazing and logging. Signs of homes, schools, churches, stores and mills were largely removed from the park, considered historically insignificant.
“For many years, we did not tell this story as well as we should have because we viewed ourselves as primarily a large natural-area park,” says Jim Northup, park superintendent since 2013.
With time, that attitude has shifted as the entire National Park Service has wrestled with the human history of places that had for many years been described as “natural.” A decade ago, the Byrd Visitor Center in Shenandoah unveiled an exhibit that retold this history with photos of the families proudly standing before the homes they built, alongside copies of the one-page appraisals they were given for their land.
The park now considers sites like Nicholson’s home to be important cultural resources. Shenandoah is seen as a place where nature meets history, where you can explore one or the other, or, as Eisenfeld has done, both.
“I can’t walk anywhere in the park without thinking about Native American history, without thinking about the early settlers,” Northup says. “Particularly when I walk past a place where I see a stone wall, and I wonder about the family that was living there, what life was like for them, how they sustained themselves.”

 
January 10
For much of the year, Shenandoah National Park is a gorgeously overgrown place. The underbrush sneaks over the trails, threatening to erase them. Off-trail, the views are densely wooded in every direction, tangled in Virginia creeper and prickly greenbrier.
This is why we have come in December, to search for things that are obscured when the park’s hollows and hillsides are green. Winter, my friend Sue Eisenfeld says, is bushwhacking season. This is when we might wander off-trail in the backcountry, discover concealed relics and still find our way back.
We are hunting for Aaron Nicholson’s home, or whatever remains of it. When the state of Virginia assembled Shenandoah National Park in the early 1930s out of a patchwork of privately owned land, Nicholson’s descendants were paid $783 for their 20-acre property here. Park records say the family had a 15-by-43-foot log home, a sizable barn, two outbuildings and an acre of orchards.
On a 1929 U.S. Geological Survey map, a black dot the size of a pinpoint seems to indicate that Nicholson lived right next to the Hughes River. So we are poking along the riverbank, a two-mile hike down from Skyline Drive, in a part of the park that is considered “wilderness.”
Bushwhacking is a comically inelegant exercise. Eisenfeld and I have to hike with our whole bodies, swinging our legs over fallen logs and flailing our arms to keep the thorns at bay. At least once, a low-hanging limb latches onto my backpack. Eventually, though, as our map promised, the homesite comes into view: a solitary, towering stone chimney in a forest of naked trees.
Aaron Nicholson owned a log home, barn, outbuildings and orchard in what is now the park. Above, Russ Nicholson, Aaron’s son, peels apples in October 1935. (Courtesy of Arthur Rothstein/Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division)
The chimney that remains of Aaron Nicholson's home in Shenandoah National Park. Nature has reclaimed many structures in the park. (Emily Badger/The Washington Post)
Most of Shenandoah is so wild and overgrown that it is easy to imagine that it was always that way. The park, about two hours west of the District, draws 1.2 million visitors a year for scenic overlooks off Skyline Drive or day trips on the Appalachian Trail through scenes that seem as untouched by man as any place we have in the Mid-Atlantic. Running along a ridgeline, the park seems far removed from development in the valley below.
But, as Eisenfeld writes in a new book that is part history, part hiking ode, this park has in fact been “de-peopled and re-wilded.” To create this vast expanse of nature, hundreds of families who lived and farmed here, who grew orchards and grazed livestock here, had to leave.
The park’s records do not indicate whether the Nicholson family willingly sold its homestead. Eighty years later, the fragments that remain easily blend into the forest. The few surviving fence posts were made out of trees that once grew here. The chimney, about 30 feet high, is stacked of the same light-colored granite-gneiss found throughout these hills.
Eisenfeld brought me here after I had read her book, “Shenandoah: A Story of Conservation and Betrayal,” which will be published next month by the University of Nebraska Press. Like her, I had hiked in this park for years, unaware of its history and the evidence of it that still lingers throughout. But, she says as we walk, “once you start seeing this, you see it everywhere.”
All around us are large rock piles, stacked decades ago by farmers picking over their fields. Stone walls suddenly visible from the trails mark boundary lines and fences that are no longer needed. The trails we walk, according to our old map, were roads connecting families here long before they became hiking paths for nature-lovers from the city.
Even the forest itself bears signs of the communities that once existed here. On land cleared years ago for pasture or farming, tulip poplars dominate the regrown forest; oaks and hickories haven’t had time to come back yet. Neil, Eisenfeld’s husband and a trained naturalist, can spot a former farm site by this forest succession.
Learn this history, and you begin to see Shenandoah in a new light: as a place that was once far from wild, that was lived in, from which families — if not all the signs of their former lives — had to be removed.
In the early 20th century, the United States already had several great national parks — Yosemite, Yellowstone, Glacier — all in the West. Advocates wanted a comparable park for the East Coast, where it would be accessible to more of the nation’s population.
Several states bid for the honor; the Virginia boosters who wanted a national park here promised that the land they had in mind was “pristine and uninhabited.” Businessman George Pollock led the push for about half a million acres that happened to surround his own Skyland resort in the Blue Ridge. “There are within the area, of course, a few small mountain farms,” he wrote to a committee considering the park, “of no great value.”
Congress authorized the creation of a park here in 1926, if Virginia could cobble together the land and donate it to the federal government. No one foresaw that the people who lived here would object.
When surveyors first appraised the area imagined for the park, they found 5,650 tracts of land and 3,250 homes, involving far more people than the state had expected and a far higher sum than it could afford to pay. Many of the families the surveyors encountered also relayed word that they did not want to sell.
The men charged with creating the park had to revise their ambitions, from 521,000 acres to, eventually, about 176,000. The reality of property values and private protest redrew the park’s boundaries into the jagged lines they are today. Still, more than 2,000 people lived within the planned final park borders. Faced with the prospect of negotiating with all of them, Virginia passed a law in 1928 allowing it to claim their land through eminent domain instead.
Some families took the money willingly. For the next decade, others tried to appeal their appraisals and even their fates, all the way to the Supreme Court. In the end, several dozen people were given lifetime residency in the park. Most, though, had to leave — the last of them through eviction in the late 1930s, their homes locked behind them or destroyed.
This is the cost some people paid for what we consider today to be conservation.
For decades, the story the park told of itself made little mention of these families. Or, worse, the prevailing history described the “hollow folk” who lived here as hillbillies who spoiled the land with grazing and logging. Signs of homes, schools, churches, stores and mills were largely removed from the park, considered historically insignificant.
“For many years, we did not tell this story as well as we should have because we viewed ourselves as primarily a large natural-area park,” says Jim Northup, park superintendent since 2013.
With time, that attitude has shifted as the entire National Park Service has wrestled with the human history of places that had for many years been described as “natural.” A decade ago, the Byrd Visitor Center in Shenandoah unveiled an exhibit that retold this history with photos of the families proudly standing before the homes they built, alongside copies of the one-page appraisals they were given for their land.
The park now considers sites like Nicholson’s home to be important cultural resources. Shenandoah is seen as a place where nature meets history, where you can explore one or the other, or, as Eisenfeld has done, both.
“I can’t walk anywhere in the park without thinking about Native American history, without thinking about the early settlers,” Northup says. “Particularly when I walk past a place where I see a stone wall, and I wonder about the family that was living there, what life was like for them, how they sustained themselves.”
Shenandoah’s relationship to its former residents is still complicated, though. The park no longer removes relics from the backcountry, but it can’t do much to maintain them, either. About 100 family cemeteries exist in the park, some containing only a few unmarked gravestones. But many are located in congressionally designated “wilderness” areas, meaning there are no roads to make it simple for descendants or others who wish to visit.
While the park is more open now about this past, it is also guarded with the specifics: There is no map that will tell you where to find Nicholson’s home, no public brochure cataloguing all the cemeteries, no trail signs to lead you to abandoned stone walls and pottery shards.
History is part of the park experience today — curated in the visitor center, or easily seen from the Fox Hollow Trail — but the park doesn’t want hikers to pocket the pottery, or to get lost looking for the more obscure sources of it. So most of these sites remain unknown to all but descendants and a few devoted history-hikers who take pride in treading lightly.

 That is what makes the discovery of a chimney in the forest, or a collapsing cabin around the Broad Hollow trail bend, so exhilarating. When Eisenfeld hikes in search of home sites she knows once existed, even places she has been before, she still doesn’t know what she will find. Chimneys crumble. Walls cave in. Headstones come into view that were overgrown last time.

 
January 10
For much of the year, Shenandoah National Park is a gorgeously overgrown place. The underbrush sneaks over the trails, threatening to erase them. Off-trail, the views are densely wooded in every direction, tangled in Virginia creeper and prickly greenbrier.
This is why we have come in December, to search for things that are obscured when the park’s hollows and hillsides are green. Winter, my friend Sue Eisenfeld says, is bushwhacking season. This is when we might wander off-trail in the backcountry, discover concealed relics and still find our way back.
We are hunting for Aaron Nicholson’s home, or whatever remains of it. When the state of Virginia assembled Shenandoah National Park in the early 1930s out of a patchwork of privately owned land, Nicholson’s descendants were paid $783 for their 20-acre property here. Park records say the family had a 15-by-43-foot log home, a sizable barn, two outbuildings and an acre of orchards.
On a 1929 U.S. Geological Survey map, a black dot the size of a pinpoint seems to indicate that Nicholson lived right next to the Hughes River. So we are poking along the riverbank, a two-mile hike down from Skyline Drive, in a part of the park that is considered “wilderness.”
Bushwhacking is a comically inelegant exercise. Eisenfeld and I have to hike with our whole bodies, swinging our legs over fallen logs and flailing our arms to keep the thorns at bay. At least once, a low-hanging limb latches onto my backpack. Eventually, though, as our map promised, the homesite comes into view: a solitary, towering stone chimney in a forest of naked trees.
Aaron Nicholson owned a log home, barn, outbuildings and orchard in what is now the park. Above, Russ Nicholson, Aaron’s son, peels apples in October 1935. (Courtesy of Arthur Rothstein/Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division)
The chimney that remains of Aaron Nicholson's home in Shenandoah National Park. Nature has reclaimed many structures in the park. (Emily Badger/The Washington Post)
Most of Shenandoah is so wild and overgrown that it is easy to imagine that it was always that way. The park, about two hours west of the District, draws 1.2 million visitors a year for scenic overlooks off Skyline Drive or day trips on the Appalachian Trail through scenes that seem as untouched by man as any place we have in the Mid-Atlantic. Running along a ridgeline, the park seems far removed from development in the valley below.
But, as Eisenfeld writes in a new book that is part history, part hiking ode, this park has in fact been “de-peopled and re-wilded.” To create this vast expanse of nature, hundreds of families who lived and farmed here, who grew orchards and grazed livestock here, had to leave.
The park’s records do not indicate whether the Nicholson family willingly sold its homestead. Eighty years later, the fragments that remain easily blend into the forest. The few surviving fence posts were made out of trees that once grew here. The chimney, about 30 feet high, is stacked of the same light-colored granite-gneiss found throughout these hills.
Eisenfeld brought me here after I had read her book, “Shenandoah: A Story of Conservation and Betrayal,” which will be published next month by the University of Nebraska Press. Like her, I had hiked in this park for years, unaware of its history and the evidence of it that still lingers throughout. But, she says as we walk, “once you start seeing this, you see it everywhere.”
All around us are large rock piles, stacked decades ago by farmers picking over their fields. Stone walls suddenly visible from the trails mark boundary lines and fences that are no longer needed. The trails we walk, according to our old map, were roads connecting families here long before they became hiking paths for nature-lovers from the city.
Even the forest itself bears signs of the communities that once existed here. On land cleared years ago for pasture or farming, tulip poplars dominate the regrown forest; oaks and hickories haven’t had time to come back yet. Neil, Eisenfeld’s husband and a trained naturalist, can spot a former farm site by this forest succession.
Learn this history, and you begin to see Shenandoah in a new light: as a place that was once far from wild, that was lived in, from which families — if not all the signs of their former lives — had to be removed.
In the early 20th century, the United States already had several great national parks — Yosemite, Yellowstone, Glacier — all in the West. Advocates wanted a comparable park for the East Coast, where it would be accessible to more of the nation’s population.
Several states bid for the honor; the Virginia boosters who wanted a national park here promised that the land they had in mind was “pristine and uninhabited.” Businessman George Pollock led the push for about half a million acres that happened to surround his own Skyland resort in the Blue Ridge. “There are within the area, of course, a few small mountain farms,” he wrote to a committee considering the park, “of no great value.”
Congress authorized the creation of a park here in 1926, if Virginia could cobble together the land and donate it to the federal government. No one foresaw that the people who lived here would object.
When surveyors first appraised the area imagined for the park, they found 5,650 tracts of land and 3,250 homes, involving far more people than the state had expected and a far higher sum than it could afford to pay. Many of the families the surveyors encountered also relayed word that they did not want to sell.
The men charged with creating the park had to revise their ambitions, from 521,000 acres to, eventually, about 176,000. The reality of property values and private protest redrew the park’s boundaries into the jagged lines they are today. Still, more than 2,000 people lived within the planned final park borders. Faced with the prospect of negotiating with all of them, Virginia passed a law in 1928 allowing it to claim their land through eminent domain instead.
Some families took the money willingly. For the next decade, others tried to appeal their appraisals and even their fates, all the way to the Supreme Court. In the end, several dozen people were given lifetime residency in the park. Most, though, had to leave — the last of them through eviction in the late 1930s, their homes locked behind them or destroyed.
This is the cost some people paid for what we consider today to be conservation.
For decades, the story the park told of itself made little mention of these families. Or, worse, the prevailing history described the “hollow folk” who lived here as hillbillies who spoiled the land with grazing and logging. Signs of homes, schools, churches, stores and mills were largely removed from the park, considered historically insignificant.
“For many years, we did not tell this story as well as we should have because we viewed ourselves as primarily a large natural-area park,” says Jim Northup, park superintendent since 2013.
With time, that attitude has shifted as the entire National Park Service has wrestled with the human history of places that had for many years been described as “natural.” A decade ago, the Byrd Visitor Center in Shenandoah unveiled an exhibit that retold this history with photos of the families proudly standing before the homes they built, alongside copies of the one-page appraisals they were given for their land.
The park now considers sites like Nicholson’s home to be important cultural resources. Shenandoah is seen as a place where nature meets history, where you can explore one or the other, or, as Eisenfeld has done, both.
“I can’t walk anywhere in the park without thinking about Native American history, without thinking about the early settlers,” Northup says. “Particularly when I walk past a place where I see a stone wall, and I wonder about the family that was living there, what life was like for them, how they sustained themselves.”
Shenandoah’s relationship to its former residents is still complicated, though. The park no longer removes relics from the backcountry, but it can’t do much to maintain them, either. About 100 family cemeteries exist in the park, some containing only a few unmarked gravestones. But many are located in congressionally designated “wilderness” areas, meaning there are no roads to make it simple for descendants or others who wish to visit.
While the park is more open now about this past, it is also guarded with the specifics: There is no map that will tell you where to find Nicholson’s home, no public brochure cataloguing all the cemeteries, no trail signs to lead you to abandoned stone walls and pottery shards.
History is part of the park experience today — curated in the visitor center, or easily seen from the Fox Hollow Trail — but the park doesn’t want hikers to pocket the pottery, or to get lost looking for the more obscure sources of it. So most of these sites remain unknown to all but descendants and a few devoted history-hikers who take pride in treading lightly.
That is what makes the discovery of a chimney in the forest, or a collapsing cabin around the Broad Hollow trail bend, so exhilarating. When Eisenfeld hikes in search of home sites she knows once existed, even places she has been before, she still doesn’t know what she will find. Chimneys crumble. Walls cave in. Headstones come into view that were overgrown last time.
A section of the Appalachian Trail very close to the Swift Run Gap Entrance Station is pictured. (Sarah L. Voisin/The Washington Post)
This grave belongs to John E. Knighten, who died in 1919, and his wife, Lizzie. Many other graves throughout the park are unmarked, with only a pair of simple stones suggesting a cemetery. (Sarah L. Voisin/The Washington Post)
If these relics were easier to find, there would be no surprise in stumbling on them, and no reward in trying to train your eyes to see the land differently. There would be no joy in being the first to call out from the middle of a briar patch “I think I found something!” There would also be less left to the imagination when you discover an old cookstove but no home around it, an old cemetery but no community nearby.
At Aaron Nicholson’s chimney, we try to reconstruct the full scene — our small way of paying respect. How would his house have been oriented? How large would it have been? Surely, it must have had two floors. And a root cellar. Did he draw his water from a spring, or straight from the river nearby? Who would he have seen passing on the road over the river that has today become a hiking trail?
What would he, and the others who lived here, think of the park today?
“They would not recognize this place,” Eisenfeld says of all of the people who lived here. The forest itself has changed, most of the chestnuts that once grew here wiped out by blight. Our wilderness is not the same as theirs.
The memory of these people also silently poses a question that runs through Eisenfeld’s book: Was it worth it? Does my own love of the park justify the Nicholson family’s loss when they left it? Confront the park’s history, and it’s hard to avoid this question. “Once you begin to know something,” Eisenfeld writes, “you cannot unknow it.”
“Everyone agrees national parks are great. But what if it’s your land?” she asks as we hike away from the Nicholson home and toward another dot on our old map. “I can’t really come to a conclusion about it.”
Maybe it would have been better if the families had been included in planning for the park instead of considered an impediment to its creation. Even then, Eisenfeld says, it’s hard to ever say that someone else’s suffering was a fair price for your pleasure.
“For me,” she later tells me, “it deepens my appreciation of a place to know what happened before, to know who lived there before, how they lived, what choices they made.”


National parks, Northup says, are a social construct. We decided as a nation to create this place, and we can just as easily decide one day to turn it over again to private hands. For any conservationist, that is a painful thought. But it is even more so once you consider the price other people paid for conserving this land in the first place: If we were to undo this, they would have lost their homes for nothing.
Our small hiking party went on to hunt for relics at another dot on the map, near Nicholson’s home. As daylight started to wane, we saw telltale rock piles, even a piece of rusting metal, maybe a barrel stave, but nothing resembling the stone foundation of a home where people would have lived. The forest may have finally reclaimed it. Or perhaps, on this day, nature was keeping the secret for herself.

 
January 10
For much of the year, Shenandoah National Park is a gorgeously overgrown place. The underbrush sneaks over the trails, threatening to erase them. Off-trail, the views are densely wooded in every direction, tangled in Virginia creeper and prickly greenbrier.
This is why we have come in December, to search for things that are obscured when the park’s hollows and hillsides are green. Winter, my friend Sue Eisenfeld says, is bushwhacking season. This is when we might wander off-trail in the backcountry, discover concealed relics and still find our way back.
We are hunting for Aaron Nicholson’s home, or whatever remains of it. When the state of Virginia assembled Shenandoah National Park in the early 1930s out of a patchwork of privately owned land, Nicholson’s descendants were paid $783 for their 20-acre property here. Park records say the family had a 15-by-43-foot log home, a sizable barn, two outbuildings and an acre of orchards.
On a 1929 U.S. Geological Survey map, a black dot the size of a pinpoint seems to indicate that Nicholson lived right next to the Hughes River. So we are poking along the riverbank, a two-mile hike down from Skyline Drive, in a part of the park that is considered “wilderness.”
Bushwhacking is a comically inelegant exercise. Eisenfeld and I have to hike with our whole bodies, swinging our legs over fallen logs and flailing our arms to keep the thorns at bay. At least once, a low-hanging limb latches onto my backpack. Eventually, though, as our map promised, the homesite comes into view: a solitary, towering stone chimney in a forest of naked trees.
Aaron Nicholson owned a log home, barn, outbuildings and orchard in what is now the park. Above, Russ Nicholson, Aaron’s son, peels apples in October 1935. (Courtesy of Arthur Rothstein/Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division)
The chimney that remains of Aaron Nicholson's home in Shenandoah National Park. Nature has reclaimed many structures in the park. (Emily Badger/The Washington Post)
Most of Shenandoah is so wild and overgrown that it is easy to imagine that it was always that way. The park, about two hours west of the District, draws 1.2 million visitors a year for scenic overlooks off Skyline Drive or day trips on the Appalachian Trail through scenes that seem as untouched by man as any place we have in the Mid-Atlantic. Running along a ridgeline, the park seems far removed from development in the valley below.
But, as Eisenfeld writes in a new book that is part history, part hiking ode, this park has in fact been “de-peopled and re-wilded.” To create this vast expanse of nature, hundreds of families who lived and farmed here, who grew orchards and grazed livestock here, had to leave.
The park’s records do not indicate whether the Nicholson family willingly sold its homestead. Eighty years later, the fragments that remain easily blend into the forest. The few surviving fence posts were made out of trees that once grew here. The chimney, about 30 feet high, is stacked of the same light-colored granite-gneiss found throughout these hills.
Eisenfeld brought me here after I had read her book, “Shenandoah: A Story of Conservation and Betrayal,” which will be published next month by the University of Nebraska Press. Like her, I had hiked in this park for years, unaware of its history and the evidence of it that still lingers throughout. But, she says as we walk, “once you start seeing this, you see it everywhere.”
All around us are large rock piles, stacked decades ago by farmers picking over their fields. Stone walls suddenly visible from the trails mark boundary lines and fences that are no longer needed. The trails we walk, according to our old map, were roads connecting families here long before they became hiking paths for nature-lovers from the city.
Even the forest itself bears signs of the communities that once existed here. On land cleared years ago for pasture or farming, tulip poplars dominate the regrown forest; oaks and hickories haven’t had time to come back yet. Neil, Eisenfeld’s husband and a trained naturalist, can spot a former farm site by this forest succession.
Learn this history, and you begin to see Shenandoah in a new light: as a place that was once far from wild, that was lived in, from which families — if not all the signs of their former lives — had to be removed.
In the early 20th century, the United States already had several great national parks — Yosemite, Yellowstone, Glacier — all in the West. Advocates wanted a comparable park for the East Coast, where it would be accessible to more of the nation’s population.
Several states bid for the honor; the Virginia boosters who wanted a national park here promised that the land they had in mind was “pristine and uninhabited.” Businessman George Pollock led the push for about half a million acres that happened to surround his own Skyland resort in the Blue Ridge. “There are within the area, of course, a few small mountain farms,” he wrote to a committee considering the park, “of no great value.”
Congress authorized the creation of a park here in 1926, if Virginia could cobble together the land and donate it to the federal government. No one foresaw that the people who lived here would object.
When surveyors first appraised the area imagined for the park, they found 5,650 tracts of land and 3,250 homes, involving far more people than the state had expected and a far higher sum than it could afford to pay. Many of the families the surveyors encountered also relayed word that they did not want to sell.
The men charged with creating the park had to revise their ambitions, from 521,000 acres to, eventually, about 176,000. The reality of property values and private protest redrew the park’s boundaries into the jagged lines they are today. Still, more than 2,000 people lived within the planned final park borders. Faced with the prospect of negotiating with all of them, Virginia passed a law in 1928 allowing it to claim their land through eminent domain instead.
Some families took the money willingly. For the next decade, others tried to appeal their appraisals and even their fates, all the way to the Supreme Court. In the end, several dozen people were given lifetime residency in the park. Most, though, had to leave — the last of them through eviction in the late 1930s, their homes locked behind them or destroyed.
This is the cost some people paid for what we consider today to be conservation.
For decades, the story the park told of itself made little mention of these families. Or, worse, the prevailing history described the “hollow folk” who lived here as hillbillies who spoiled the land with grazing and logging. Signs of homes, schools, churches, stores and mills were largely removed from the park, considered historically insignificant.
“For many years, we did not tell this story as well as we should have because we viewed ourselves as primarily a large natural-area park,” says Jim Northup, park superintendent since 2013.
With time, that attitude has shifted as the entire National Park Service has wrestled with the human history of places that had for many years been described as “natural.” A decade ago, the Byrd Visitor Center in Shenandoah unveiled an exhibit that retold this history with photos of the families proudly standing before the homes they built, alongside copies of the one-page appraisals they were given for their land.
The park now considers sites like Nicholson’s home to be important cultural resources. Shenandoah is seen as a place where nature meets history, where you can explore one or the other, or, as Eisenfeld has done, both.
“I can’t walk anywhere in the park without thinking about Native American history, without thinking about the early settlers,” Northup says. “Particularly when I walk past a place where I see a stone wall, and I wonder about the family that was living there, what life was like for them, how they sustained themselves.”
Shenandoah’s relationship to its former residents is still complicated, though. The park no longer removes relics from the backcountry, but it can’t do much to maintain them, either. About 100 family cemeteries exist in the park, some containing only a few unmarked gravestones. But many are located in congressionally designated “wilderness” areas, meaning there are no roads to make it simple for descendants or others who wish to visit.
While the park is more open now about this past, it is also guarded with the specifics: There is no map that will tell you where to find Nicholson’s home, no public brochure cataloguing all the cemeteries, no trail signs to lead you to abandoned stone walls and pottery shards.
History is part of the park experience today — curated in the visitor center, or easily seen from the Fox Hollow Trail — but the park doesn’t want hikers to pocket the pottery, or to get lost looking for the more obscure sources of it. So most of these sites remain unknown to all but descendants and a few devoted history-hikers who take pride in treading lightly.
That is what makes the discovery of a chimney in the forest, or a collapsing cabin around the Broad Hollow trail bend, so exhilarating. When Eisenfeld hikes in search of home sites she knows once existed, even places she has been before, she still doesn’t know what she will find. Chimneys crumble. Walls cave in. Headstones come into view that were overgrown last time.
A section of the Appalachian Trail very close to the Swift Run Gap Entrance Station is pictured. (Sarah L. Voisin/The Washington Post)
This grave belongs to John E. Knighten, who died in 1919, and his wife, Lizzie. Many other graves throughout the park are unmarked, with only a pair of simple stones suggesting a cemetery. (Sarah L. Voisin/The Washington Post)
If these relics were easier to find, there would be no surprise in stumbling on them, and no reward in trying to train your eyes to see the land differently. There would be no joy in being the first to call out from the middle of a briar patch “I think I found something!” There would also be less left to the imagination when you discover an old cookstove but no home around it, an old cemetery but no community nearby.
At Aaron Nicholson’s chimney, we try to reconstruct the full scene — our small way of paying respect. How would his house have been oriented? How large would it have been? Surely, it must have had two floors. And a root cellar. Did he draw his water from a spring, or straight from the river nearby? Who would he have seen passing on the road over the river that has today become a hiking trail?
What would he, and the others who lived here, think of the park today?
“They would not recognize this place,” Eisenfeld says of all of the people who lived here. The forest itself has changed, most of the chestnuts that once grew here wiped out by blight. Our wilderness is not the same as theirs.
The memory of these people also silently poses a question that runs through Eisenfeld’s book: Was it worth it? Does my own love of the park justify the Nicholson family’s loss when they left it? Confront the park’s history, and it’s hard to avoid this question. “Once you begin to know something,” Eisenfeld writes, “you cannot unknow it.”
“Everyone agrees national parks are great. But what if it’s your land?” she asks as we hike away from the Nicholson home and toward another dot on our old map. “I can’t really come to a conclusion about it.”
Maybe it would have been better if the families had been included in planning for the park instead of considered an impediment to its creation. Even then, Eisenfeld says, it’s hard to ever say that someone else’s suffering was a fair price for your pleasure.
“For me,” she later tells me, “it deepens my appreciation of a place to know what happened before, to know who lived there before, how they lived, what choices they made.”
National parks, Northup says, are a social construct. We decided as a nation to create this place, and we can just as easily decide one day to turn it over again to private hands. For any conservationist, that is a painful thought. But it is even more so once you consider the price other people paid for conserving this land in the first place: If we were to undo this, they would have lost their homes for nothing.
Our small hiking party went on to hunt for relics at another dot on the map, near Nicholson’s home. As daylight started to wane, we saw telltale rock piles, even a piece of rusting metal, maybe a barrel stave, but nothing resembling the stone foundation of a home where people would have lived. The forest may have finally reclaimed it. Or perhaps, on this day, nature was keeping the secret for herself.
If you go
Shenandoah National Park
www.nps.gov/shen, 540-999-5300
Open year-round; hiking recommended during daylight. The park’s four main entrances are located in Front Royal, Thornton Gap, Swift Run and Rockfish Gap. Entrance fee is $5 for visitors 16 and older December-February; $8 from March-November. Car fee to enter is $10 per vehicle December-February; $15 March-November. Annual passes $30.
Lodges and campgrounds inside the park are closed in winter, but Front Royal, Sperryville and Luray offer lodging with easy park access. The Potomac Appalachian Trail Club operates several primitive hike-in cabins inside the park in rehabbed historic homes that can be rented. $30-$90 a night. www.patc.net.
Food concessions in the park are closed in winter, so bring your lunch if you’re hiking, and stop for dinner outside the park on your way home.
The Harry F. Byrd Sr. Visitor Center, located near Big Meadows at Mile Marker 51 on Skyline Drive, tells the history of the park and includes historical reference material (plus bathrooms and a bookstore). In winter, it’s open Fridays, Saturdays, Sundays and holiday Mondays from 9:30 a.m.-4 p.m. Open daily beginning March 28.
The park has more than 500 miles of trails, many through areas that were once inhabited. The Fox Hollow and Snead Farm Loop trails, across Skyline Drive from the Dickey Ridge Visitor Center, offer an easy hike to cemeteries and old homesites.
Information
www.nps.gov/shen/index.htm

Sunday, December 21, 2014

Eastman House Exhibit Captures End Of The Film Era


Eastman House exhibits document fading of film and tools of the photography trade

Crowds gather to watch the implosion of Kodak Park in Rochester.     
Crowds gather to watch the implosion of Kodak Park in Rochester. 



Eastman Kodak, the company synonymous with capturing and preserving the past on film, is now trying to become a technology company focused on imaging for business.     But while still holding on to its past, Kodak continues to make still film for consumers and professionals. It is still made in Rochester, in the former Kodak Park, now the Eastman Business Park, and is sold by an independent spin-off called Kodak Alaris. And at Kodak.com you can now find the “Kodak Moment of the Day,” a compendium of pictures submitted from folks the world over, an operation run by Kodak Alaris, and hosted on the Kodak.com website.

It wasn’t that long ago that we were all popping rolls out of a camera and taking them to the drug store to be developed. While this 20th century process lives on, the scale is greatly reduced.
Which brings us to “The Disappearance of Darkness,” an exhibit in Rochester’s George Eastman House, the International Museum of Photography and Film, by acclaimed photographer and Ryerson University professor, Robert Burley. Burley realized the world was changing with the announcement that Kodak Canada, where both cameras and film were made, would be closing.
“Is anybody going to photograph that?” he wondered.
He decided he would. With the digital age upon us, Burley’s odyssey began, chronicling in pictures the decommissioning of Kodak Canada, parts of Rochester’s Kodak Park, a Kodak plant in France, Agfa-Gevaert in Belgium, Ilford operations in England, and Polaroid closures in Enschede, Netherlands, and Waltham, Mass.
“There were a lot of final moments,” he said to me of shooting Kodak plants imploding in Canada, the United States and France, relaying the sadness he felt as companies that were part of his personal history as a photographer, either faded away completely or emerged from bankruptcy, not quite what they once were. The exhibit’s most ironic moment occurs in Rochester, as Burley’s camera captures dozens of photographers, digital cameras at the ready, waiting to photograph a Kodak Park implosion, many not likely realizing the proliferation of digital devices they held in their hands would bring them to witness, at the push of a button, almost as easily employed as those on their now ubiquitous cameras, the end of an industry.
“People who made film really had a feel for it,” Burley told an opening-day assembly, while fondling a roll of Kodak Tri-X in his hands.
Burley and camera came to Rochester to shoot the implosions of Kodak Park’s buildings 65 and 69. And “I had to go,” he said me upon hearing news that a Kodak plant in Chalon-Sur-Saone, France, would also be imploded. Those pictures also are on display.
But it wasn’t just buildings being blown up, the gone-in-30-seconds phenomenon he frequently experienced, “spectacular and sad at the same time,” he said. There also are the empty offices: an employee identification board at Polaroid’s Enschede, Netherlands, facility, shot in 2010; a Kodak image center and coating plant, buildings 7 and 13 at Kodak Canada, where only building 9 still stands. There are film coffins, film piles and bags of photographic emulsion from Ilford’s Mobberry, England, site. And Polaroid prints found by Burley himself at a factory in Waltham, Mass., closed in 2009, probably taken by company personnel.
Today the George Eastman House, as it has since its 1947 founding, documents the history of imaging, and with “Innovation in the Imaging Capital,” gives us many highlights, and solidifies Rochester’s role.
In 1888 Kodak introduced its first camera, the snapshot model. The one on display, still operable, is loaded with Eastman American Film, the only known example. The Brownie camera also is displayed, the first in a line that would eclipse 200 adaptations, until production on the Brownie Fiesta R4 ceased in March 1970. There’s also a 1938 Super Kodak Six-20, the first automatic exposure camera, and a 1963 Instamatic, a model that lasted into the mid-1990’s, reputed to be the best-selling camera ever.
Moving slightly ahead in time, and displayed publicly at the Eastman House for the first time, the forerunner to our current capture, save, and share every moment, everywhere culture, is 1975’s digital camera, the first ever. Steven J. Sasson, an electrical engineer hired by Kodak in 1973, and the digital camera’s inventor, was on hand at the opening of the exhibit.
While Kodak developed digital technology, it partnered with Canon, Nikon, and for 1994’s NC 2000, with the Associated Press. Into a Nikon F3 body, Kodak implanted its innovations, resulting in a camera that was popular with professional photographers, with some of the advanced versions valued at $25,000. Earlier on, in a 1991 New York City news conference, Kodak rolled out the DCS, the first color digital single lens reflex camera for amateurs.
There are a lot of firsts on display. Among them are moon images taken by a lunar orbiter, and a view of the earth from near the moon, taken by Lunar Orbiter I on Aug. 23, 1966. There’s a mural image of crater Copernicus, taken by Lunar Orbiter II on Nov. 23, 1966. And “Camera Goes Aboard,” depicts a World War I image, a ground crew hands off a reconnaissance camera to a plane’s pilots.
For the camera curious, both “The Disappearance of Darkness” and “Innovation in the Imaging Capital” offer a fascinating glimpse into the world behind the lens.

If you go

Both exhibits run through Jan. 4.
The George Eastman House (900 East Ave., Rochester, NY 14607; (585) 271-3361; www.eastmanhouse.org), is open from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. Tuesdays to Saturdays; 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. Sundays. Admission is adults $14, seniors $12, students with identification $5, children 12 and under free.
House tours run from 10:30 a.m. to 2 p.m.
Gallery tours are at 1 p.m.

Friday, December 19, 2014

Dec 6, 2014 Dancer; dancing....

“At the still point, there the dance is.”
—T. S. Eliot, “Four Quartets”

            




 sadoslavehome:

Visit My Blog FOR MORE PHOTOS and FOLLOW ME PLEASE!!!



---{-=@

HICKOK

Friday, December 12, 2014

Trade your ‘double-double’ For A Relaxing Cup of Tea

Trade your ‘double-double’ for a relaxing cup of tea 

In a world in which the ‘double-double’ rules, sipping a cup of tea can seem terribly quaint. But the brew – steeped in history, infused with gentility – is worth lingering over.

 

on December 7, 2014 -


Susan Tomporowski, left, and Meg Lenz enjoy afternoon tea at the Asa Ransom House in Clarence, which is offered by reservation every Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday throughout the year (except for January). Also provided: a selection of finger sandwiches and fruit garnish, scones with jam and Devonshire cream and elegant cakes and pastries.
Susan Tomporowski, left, and Meg Lenz enjoy afternoon tea at the Asa Ransom House in Clarence, which is offered by reservation every Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday throughout the year (except for January). Also provided: a selection of finger sandwiches and fruit garnish, scones with jam and Devonshire cream and elegant cakes and pastries. Photos by Sharon Cantillon/Buffalo News


""""""""""""""""""""""When she graduated from college in 1981, Jan Tyson made a bold move that would change her life.
“I taught myself to drink tea,” she said. “Because I figured I was an adult then, and I needed a hot beverage. I like the smell of coffee grounds, and I don’t mind the smell of it being brewed. But it’s too bitter for me, and I didn’t want to have to put cream or sugar in it. I tried it several times, and I don’t like it, I thought, ‘I’ll drink tea.’ ”
Not easy."""""""""""""""""""""""""


   
 Asa Ransom House has Afternoon Tea every Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday through ought the year (except for January) by reservation from 1-4 p.m. They provide a selection of finger sandwiches and fruit garnish, scones with jam and Devonshire cream, elegant cakes and pastries. Photo taken, Tuesday, Dec. 2, 2014. (Sharon Cantillon/Buffalo News)
 ~~~~~~Our nation was founded on tea. It was the drink of the British settlers, so essential that taxes on it led to the Boston Tea Party. But now, the country runs on coffee.
Shoppers barrel through Wegmans with their lattes by their side. Cars line up at Dunkin’ Donuts and Tim Hortons. Buffalo, home to descendants of immigrants from Germany, Poland and Italy, is especially coffee-centric.
What’s a tea drinker to do?
Jan Ferington, who like Tyson is a tea drinker, admits she sometimes feels out in the cold.
“When you’re sitting around the table, and they come around with the coffee pot, it’s kind of weird,” explained Ferington, who is co-host, with restaurateur Russell Salvatore, of Channel 7’s “Come Dine With Me.”
“People say, ‘You don’t drink coffee?’ ” she lamented. “It’s just such a universal thing.”
Tyson lives in the genteel village of Kenmore and works for the Presbyterian Church, a denomination that, with its Scottish origins, must be home to more than a few tea drinkers. But she, too, often feels marginalized.
“Tim Hortons and McDonald’s, the water they use generally has run through the coffee machine,” she said. “Or it’s in a carafe that has had coffee in it. Some places I won’t drink tea because the water is coffee-flavored. I have the issue at church. Sometimes they put the water (for tea) in a carafe where they had coffee. They have good tea bags, but the water’s not good.”
She has learned to be patient.
“It annoys me a little bit,” she admitted. “But I kind of go with the flow.”

‘Keep Calm with Tea’

Her patience illustrates the civilized, easygoing nature of tea.
Tea stands for civilization. It harkens back to the days of the old British Empire.
Coffee is superhero movies. Tea is Downton Abbey. Coffee is get up and go. Tea is sit down and rest. Coffee is ambition. Tea is relaxation.
A tea drinker is, in a small way, a crusader against the rush and bustle of the world.
“ ‘Let’s go out for some tea’ has a different connotation, much more sophisticated, not as casual, very elegant,” Ferington said. “Tea is much slower and relaxed.”
Tea has an entirely different set of accoutrements. There is the obligatory steeping time, during which you do nothing. The typical teapot is made to share. British afternoon tea and Chinese tea ceremonies are designed for peaceful civility.
“Keep Calm with Tea This Holiday Season,” said an email from Celestial Seasonings. The message went on to say soothingly: “Tea’s unique ability to relax and refresh is welcomed a little more than usual during this hectic season.”
Celestial Seasonings, dating from the hippieish year of 1969, is known for its flowery packaging and philosophical quotes. Other brands build on a more British sense of calm. Twinings emphasizes its 300-year history. It still occupies the same tiny storefront in London that it had when it was founded, in 1706. Tetley dates to 1820, Lipton to 1871.
Ron Link grew up on Red Rose, an august Canadian brand established in 1890.
“I came from kind of a privileged family, and one of the things we used to do without thinking a lot about it, we’d always serve tea around dinner time,” said Link, a legal business consultant who lives in Amherst. “We’d have a cup in the morning, a cup in the evening. I got to drinking it as a young boy. I wouldn’t think about it other than that I liked it. I didn’t like coffee.
“My grandfather was president of Buffalo Savings Bank when I was little. His name was Raymond Eisenhardt. He would have meetings at the Buffalo Club, and we would be taught to be very proper, even at 5 or 6 or 7. You had to drink tea, you had to wear a blazer. It sort of taught you how to live like a gentleman,” he said.
Kids typically rebel in college, and Link was no exception.
“In college, I started drinking coffee,” he confessed. “I was a kind of caffeine achiever, thinking benefits of caffeine would help me study.”
Later, though, his love for tea returned. It intensified in the last year with his interest in Asian martial arts and Chinese medicine, interests he pursues at Gold Summit Martial Arts Institute.
“It expanded my awareness of tea and the benefits of drinking tea,” said Link, who loves to expound at length, in a tea drinker’s unhurried manner, on tea’s healthfulness. “We do berry tea after workouts. Goji berry is the tea Master Markle recommends, with chrysanthemum.” Master Markle is his teacher, Erin Markle.
Link also lingers over the occasional cup of tea at Barnes & Noble. The ratio of coffee to tea there, he reckoned, is 60 percent coffee, 40 percent tea – a decent proportion, given reality. In the bookstore cafe, as in the martial arts studio, he feels he is in like-minded company.
“A lot of people who are at Barnes & Noble are UB students, and a lot of them are foreign,” he pointed out. “A lot of them drink tea as opposed to coffee. It’s a cultural thing, no question about it.
“Coffee is associated with speed and quickness,” he reflected. “It has to do with the speed of our culture in the West. People aren’t used to doing things like meditating. It’s all about how fast you can do things, how quickly you can get your goals accomplished. It’s different from the process of tea, where you can sit and relax.”

An invitation to linger

Tea places and tea accoutrements tend to invite leisure.
Teavana, the tea emporium in the Walden Galleria, invites visitors to linger. The store is generous with tastes. There is a chocolate tea like hot chocolate. TeaLeafs on Main Street in Williamsville has adopted the comforting slogan: “A cup of tea makes everything better.”
Tea Leaf Cafe in Maple Ridge Plaza declares: “Call us crazy, but we believe everyone deserves a bit of TLC.” At the White Linen Tea House in Wheatfield, owner Linda Kloch offers more than 100 varieties and offers a full afternoon tea service every day except Wednesday, in addition to a Mini Tea for children. The restaurant even gives you a timer with your tea, to make sure you give it the right time to steep.
The Asa Ransom House serves afternoon tea by reservation on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday afternoons. It is held in the plush Ransom Room, with floral wallpaper and a flaming hearth.
“To begin, you are presented with a choice of Harney & Sons teas, along with a pot of hot water,” is how the inn describes the ritual. “Shortly after you’ve enjoyed your first sips of tea, a tiered tray of scones, sandwiches and cakes arrives at your table. Savory sandwiches may include cucumber, chicken salad and tuna. Cheesecake, chocolate cake, cookies and fruit complete the experience, which usually lasts between 1 or 2 hours.”
Tea is beginning to encroach on coffee territory. The Tim Hortons in the new HarborCenter has a prominent tea display.
“I love the Orange Cat. It’s in Lewiston,” said Jan Ferington. “They make the tea for you, and they have these great scones. I think they do coffee too.”
Her uncertainty on this point shows the extent to which the cafe caters to tea drinkers: Its full name is the Orange Cat Coffee Co. “But they have all these teas against a wall,” Ferington said. “It’s this really cool little house.”
The Pillars, a restored mansion in Albion, recently initiated an afternoon tea. Owner Tony McMurtrie restored the once run-down mansion with help from relatives from his native Scotland. Now, he is restoring the tea tradition.
Luxury is on the menu. The Pillars also has a baby-grand piano. The place lends itself so well to retro luxe that it plays host to an annual Titanic Dinner, where guests can imagine they are passengers on the doomed ocean liner.
Jan Tyson has noticed that tea drinkers are catered to a little more now than they once were.
“Some of the nicer restaurants, the more expensive ones I don’t go to that often, they have the nice display case with the six or eight or even 12 flavors of tea,” she said. “You get a range of flavors instead of just black tea or decaf.
“I think they’re becoming more accommodating to tea drinkers. When they come around at banquets with pots of coffee, I’ll ask for tea, and there will be a couple of people at the table who tell me, thanks for asking, that they wouldn’t have thought of it. People are gracious about it. They don’t look at me funny anymore when I ask for tea.”
“I have seen it change in the last 20 years. It’s become a lot easier to become a tea drinker.”

‘Tea you have not’

Which isn’t to say there’s not a distance to go.
Link laughs about the song “T.U.S.A.,” by the band Masters of Reality. “The drummer, Ginger Baker, is Scottish, and he jokes about drinking tea in U.S.,” he said. “It’s quite funny, has to do with the tradition of making a proper cup of tea. That’s one thing too that you learn when you drink the tea at Gold Summit. The water is so hot, it’s hard to hold the cup.”
“One thing in this country that really bothers me/Is the inability of Yanks to make a good cup of tea,” the song begins, as Baker plays the kind of uncompromising tattoo you might hear accompanying bagpipes.
They bring you a cup with a lemon slice
And an unopened tea bag beside it (how nice)
And a pot of water and it may be hot
But boiling it isn’t so tea you have not
The song dates to 1992, but recent comments on the YouTube video suggest that things have not improved much since then.
“Love it!” reads one. “ When I first came to live in U.S.A. 20 years ago, my mission was to teach Americans how to make a cup of tea. I failed. Totally. Now I am trying to bring peace between Palestine and Israel and it is so much easier.”
Tea drinkers, though, are an accepting lot, content with small victories.
“I do like restaurants who have their little tin carafes, that they have hot water in,” said Jan Tyson. “Then I feel like a full person, because they usually put coffee on the table too.
“It makes me think, ‘Yes, I matter.’ ”
email: mkunz@buffnews.com~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

In Japan, Pearl Harbor Is Seen As Just Another Battle In A Decades-Long War

In Japan, Pearl Harbor is seen as just another battle in a decades-long war~~~~~~~~~~~~~

By Albert Siegel

McClatchy Foreign Staff  December 6, 2014 


SECOND WORLD WAR 7 MCT
The battleships USS West Virginia and USS Tennessee appear after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941.
NATIONAL ARCHIVE — MCT 


— For Americans, Sunday marks the 73rd anniversary of the Dec. 7, 1941, Japanese sneak attack on the Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor, the air raid on the Hawaiian base that killed 2,403 Americans and drew the United States into World War II.
But with the exception of a fireworks display to honor the dead in Nagaoka, Honolulu’s sister city, the anniversary of the attack, which took place Tokyo time on Dec. 8, will pass largely unremarked in Japan, even though it marked a sea change in Japan’s place in the world.
For Japanese, the Pearl Harbor attack wasn’t the start of war, but the continuation of a Japanese struggle to remain free of outside influence that had been going on since Commodore Matthew Perry of the U.S. Navy sailed into Tokyo Bay in 1853 and ordered the Japanese to open their country to trade with the outside world.
Until then, contact with outsiders was a crime punishable by death. Afterward, Japan found itself hardly able to compete with the Western powers that wanted to trade with it.
Without abundant natural resources, Japan imported the vast majority of its oil and raw materials from the United States, Great Britain, and the Dutch East Indies. In this telling, fear that it was losing its independence forced Japan to seek its own source of raw materials, expanding into territories under Western control. War with the United States was virtually inevitable as a result of modernization, this version holds.
Current Japanese textbooks have little to say on the attack itself, and Japanese, questioned about the subject, say they know little of what took place. What they do know places the attack, which involved more than 300 aircraft, two bombing waves and six aircraft carriers, in the context of the many wars that were going on at the time.
Mayako Shibata, a university student, said that she can’t remember any class where she learned why the attack on Pearl Harbor happened. She did learn, she said, that some in the government opposed it.
Other Japanese, uncomfortable with the topic, declined to talk on the record about Pearl Harbor, including educators.
But a picture of how Japan views the conflict can be found at the Yasukuni Shrine, one of the most controversial sites in Japan. Visits by current Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to the shrine anger Japan’s neighbors, who accuse Abe of trying to beautify and rewrite Japan’s war history.
The shrine memorializes among Japan’s war dead 14 former Japanese officials who after World War II were found guilty of crimes against peace, including Hideki Tojo, the general-turned-prime minister who approved the attack on Pearl Harbor and was hanged after the war.
But it’s the museum to Japan’s military history at the shrine that lays out Japanese thinking on why the Pearl Harbor attack took place.
A Mitsubishi A6M Zero Fighter, once the pride of Japan’s military, dominates the lobby. Dozens of images decorate the walls showing the Japanese military in heroic form, often shooting down American aircraft.
After sections devoted to earlier centuries of history and military artifacts comes the section devoted to World War II. It’s here where you learn Japan’s official line on the war.
A timeline leaves the impression that Japan was forced into the Pearl Harbor attack by the United States, which had demanded that Japan unconditionally withdraw from China and other territories, or face severe consequences. After negotiations broke down, the U.S., Great Britain and the Dutch East Indies froze Japanese assets and imposed an oil embargo with the goal of pushing Japan into a corner.
The timeline makes clear the Japanese feel they were manipulated into attacking America.
“At the White House, the President, Secretary of State and Secretaries of War and the Navy meet and discuss war with Japan,” the text says. “They explore means to maneuver them (Japan) into the position of firing the first shot without allowing much danger to ourselves.”
Roosevelt, the explanation goes on, orders his subordinates “to prepare for a surprise attack, which is likely to occur on December 1.”
This text is written in English and Japanese so that visitors won’t miss the Japanese position on what led to the attack.
Experts on the Japanese view of the war, again speaking not for attribution, said no Japanese official at the time entertained the idea that Japan could win a war with the United States, whose industrial capacity was far greater.
But they did hope that by crippling the U.S. Pacific Fleet they could buy time to conquer their Asian neighbors, acquire more oil to add to Japan’s two-year supply, and stockpile other natural resources from other parts of East Asia in hopes of forcing the United States into negotiations on more equal terms.
It was a strategy doomed to fail.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/12/06/249222/in-japan-pearl-harbor-is-seen.html#storylink=cpy

 


Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/12/06/249222/in-japan-pearl-harbor-is-seen.html#storylink=cpy