Those are 3 comments on the London Times article "Give it a miss and head to Durham: Dan Snow’s verdict shakes Stonehenge."
Dan Snow is identified as a "broadcaster," and he's giving advice to visitors doing a historical tour ("You take in York, you take in Durham, you take in Hadrian’s Wall, Hexham — you get into the Borders, Edinburgh, Kelso, Stirling Castle. I think that trip is probably stronger, the strongest in the isles. I think I would suggest people go to Durham Cathedral rather than Stonehenge").
A "bestselling historian," Tom Holland, says Snow is "deranged," because Stonehenge is "iconic," easily "recognise[d] from a silhouette." But I think those are the very things that disappoint you when you go see them in person. You get the feeling, yes, there it is, looking exactly like all the pictures I've seen. Maybe it's a bit of a surprise to see that it's bigger or smaller than it seemed from the picture. And if it's something you thought would give you a magical mystical experience, you're least likely to get it if the place is a popular tourist attraction.
पोस्ट्स
६५ टिप्पण्या:
There's apparently a freeway going right through the middle of Stonehenge. It is very rare that it isn't noisy.
There are many uncrowded, though less spectacular, stone circles in Britain, if communion with the ancients is what you seek.
I can guarantee that Carhenge in NE is not disappointing. It is magical.
They used to sell little hammers for you to chip off a piece. It wasn’t that crowded when I went there in the nineties, maybe as many people as you would see at a little league baseball game, but stuff was somewhat roped off.
Funny: He makes it sound like he's a thousand years old. And I thought Tom Holland was Spider-Man.
been to Stonehenge the old way. Been to most of the big sites and many obscure ones. Of them, I think my favorites, in order
1 Yorkminster
2. Westminster Abbey
3. Bath
4 Tintagel Castle and Cornwall
5 Dunvegan Castle and Skye
6 Blenheim Palace
7 Lake country
8 Imperial War Museum
9 British Museum
10 Windsor
Yesterday, we drove from Cancun to the Mayan ruins at Chechen Itza (sp?) Folks there tell the gringos it's pronounced "Chicken Pizza").
Very impressive and covers much more ground than just the famous pyramid.
Also very crowded by tourists and locals selling stuff. I wish I had visited there 40 years ago.
This is the case with a lot of old monuments. With travel as cheap as it is today, there's just too many tourists who would go scratching graffiti onto the walls, effacing the graffiti of historical interest from a thousand years ago. Same reason the location of the Methuselah Tree is supposed to be a secret.
It's kind of like going to Plymouth Rock.
Stonehenge and things like it (i.e. the Mona Lisa, etc.) are the "Hi...I'm in Delaware" visits of the sightseeing world.
And they've been this way for a long time to say nothing of the hideousness of the insta-crowd and the gaggles of early Japanese twenty-somethings and their selfie-sticks. I really hate them especially...
I've little doubt this is what happened to the Georgia guides tones. Some guy was so utterly disappointed with his underwhelming visit he blew the crap out of them. English Heritage (which owns stonehenge) would be wise to take notice.
I think with something like Stonehenge, you have to be still and imagine its history, with your own mental painting of the people building it and using it. That takes time and stillness, and it sure doesn't sound like that's possible now. A pile of rocks surrounded by noise.
I've been to the Manassas battlefield several times, and although perhaps more naturally picturesque than Stonehenge, it requires the same effort to get the most out of it. It's just a bunch of rolling fields with a couple of old buildings. But if you know something about its role in starting the Civil War (the Park Service exhibits do a good job), and be still within it, it's sobering and riveting. At peak times there are plenty of people tromping around, and a couple of thin roads cut through--somewhat like back then--but it sounds like a much better experience than Stonehenge.
Like our host I think travel is generally overrated, but one experience that blew my socks off was seeing the Grand Canyon. I've told friends many times that photos can't do it justice. Also touristy but you have to stand there to grasp the scale of that place.
Lloyd W. Robertson said...
There's apparently a freeway going right through the middle of Stonehenge. It is very rare that it isn't noisy.
There is a road that runs close to the site. (Your street to your house close.) It is constantly being patrolled by Ministry of Defense security vehicles due to there being a high security military base nearby (can't think of which one at the moment). And, yes, it does spoil the experience.
I have been to Stonehenge and Snow is correct, but it's not because of the henge itself. The problem is that there's no real visitors center and very little staff at the site. When I was there about twenty years ago you got a choice of one of two recored tours. The first tour was a bare bones, flat recitation of basic facts about the henge and boring as Hell.
The second tour was was so detailed that you'd have needed a full day to absorb it, which becomes a problem if you're like us and were day tripping from London. The site is somewhat remote. The closest town is Salisbury and IIRC its a 45 minute bus ride from town to the henge. If you really want to do the site right, you need to book a room locally as it takes 2+ hours to get to go from London to Salisbury by train.
And he is definitely correct about the cathedrals. We made a short visit to Salisbury cathedral and I found it far more interesting than the henge. If I were to ever go back to the UK, I'd probably make time to go back to Salisbury just to see the cathedral. I bypass the henge, though.
Memories from 2014. The freeway is not through, but close by enough. There is also a distinct barnyard smell that is seldom mentioned on the day I was there. I kind of thought that part made it more authentic. The stones are distinctly smaller than on the pictures to my mind, and the only way up was by vans from the visitors center to the stones. Met nice folks from Pekin, Illinois on the trip up in the van.
I remember being able to walk right up to Mona Lisa and Michelangelo's David. People seemed to know enough not to touch Lisa, but David was fair game. I wouldn't want to see either now, under current conditions.
Back in the 60s and 70s, neighborhood kids could and did wander at will around Frank Lloyd Wright's Taliesin near Spring Green during the six months of the year when the fellowship was out in Scottsdale. There was no security except for the "Danger: Cyanide Poisoning" signs they would randomly scatter about.
It's not the only stone circle in England. There's Avebury.
Durham is a lot farther from London than a day's drive around the Cotswolds.
I walked among the stones at Stonehenge in 1977.
back in 1992, i Swear! My word as a gilbar, that there was a sign that said:
"Take a picture, from RIGHT HERE; and it will look Just Like those postcards you've seen"
I'm not joking, seriously, no joke; there was a sign that said exactly that.
And, it made me think.. WHY would i want the same pic that millions have already taken?
Of course, my pic wouldn't have looked like the postcard; because there were 3 thousand people there
So glad that I had the good fortune to travel in the 70s when I was in my 20s. Visited the Acropolis on a cold winter day and felt that I had the place to myself. A few guards were hidden in discreet locations. All of my recent travel is primarily so my wife can see this stuff but it is such a depressing experience. So, no desire to visit Stonehenge, Durham or Hadrian's Wall. Would rather hang out in a bar in some unknown Croatian town and observe people. Althouse has the right idea on travel.
When I visited England years ago, I chose to see Avebury Circle instead of Stonehenge. Wish I had gone to Stonehenge.
I blame Spinal Tap
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAXzzHM8zLw
Growing up at Stonehenge
"And if it's something you thought would give you a magical mystical experience,"
I think your discontent with travel is that you expect too much of the world.
In the case of Stonehenge, given my fascination with astronomy I would love to see it. But not if I had to view it from afar.
"Also very crowded by tourists and locals selling stuff. I wish I had visited there 40 years ago".
That's exactly how it was in 1991.
"You get the feeling, yes, there it is, looking exactly like all the pictures I've seen."
I generally don't agree with Althouse's opinion of travel. But I must admit having felt this way several times in my travels.
"Also very crowded by tourists and locals selling stuff. I wish I had visited there 40 years ago".
That's exactly how it was in 1991.
There are quite a few stone circles in Enlgand, many of them unguarded in fields at the end of windy dirt roads. In the early 1990s, my wife and I lived in London for a few months and often on the weekends searched out stone circles. When my parents visited, we inflicted this pastime on them for a day or so on a roadtrip, till my mother expressed an interest in not seeing anymore of the "silly stones."
I went to Stonehenge in the early 80s as a kid. You could walk among the stones, if I recall. But it was a disappointment. It looks more iconic and mystical in photos than in real life. The same day we saw Salisbury Cathedral, which was glorious. I would have preferred to spend the entire day at the cathedral, and the town of Salisbury, even as a kid. The only benefit was once I came home, I could tell my friends (7th grade) that I'd been to Stonehenge. Everyone thought that was cool.
“How to Build Stinegenge” is a great book on how the structure was erected over the centuries and how the various stones were brought there from their far away quarries. By Mike Pitts. The top stones were mined in Wales many miles and rivers from Stonehenge. Fascinating. Archeological and geological sleuthing.
i go to Shiloh just about every spring (when the battle took place),
It's a big place, and most people have no idea where it is; so it's not very crowded.
Last April i was on the "sunken road" road, and it was just me; the monuments, the open field and about a thousand ghosts.
I stood by the Iowa 7th Infantry monument, and looked across the open field..
Thinking of standing there watching yet Another wave of rebels coming across at me.
Then i went around to the other side, and stood in Those trees..
Thinking of having to march yet AGAIN across that field into those f*cking Iowans.
Finally, i went to the cemetery, which is like Most military cemeteries, except that about a third (it seemed) of the stones were short and square, instead of tall and rectangular.
The short and squares meant: Unknown Union Soldier
Rebels aren't In the cemetery, They're still on the field, with signs saying (Mass Confederate Grave)
If you want to be steeped in history, don't go someplace crowded with tourists
We were there in June, and it's actually quite well done. There is such a volume of people visiting it's hard to imagine the damage that could be done if they were all allowed closer. Also, honestly, you'd never get a good picture, because there would be people everywhere (Bill Bryson makes this point in one of his books). We took the shuttle to the stones and then walked back to the visitors' center via the cursus and path, which gave us some space away from the crowds and a bit of time to think and talk about the entire place. There are mounds everywhere surrounding the actual stones, which I had no idea about until we visited. It wasn't our favorite part of this England trip but it was well worth the detour on the way from Bath to Windsor. We also stopped at West Kennet Long Barrow the same day, and that did give us the experience of being able to walk right up to something very old, and with few people around. You can go inside the barrow and see the niches where they found bodies; it's pretty creepy and delightful - and just sitting in some farmer's field.
As an aside, the MoD base nearby means you're constantly driving by "Tank Crossing" signs. These were almost as much a family favorite as the wild boar warning signs you see on the roads in Croatia, where we were the summer before.
Christopher is 100% right about the Grand Canyon. Even though you've seen all sorts of pictures and video of it, you're just dumbfounded the first time you see it in person. It's well worth the visit - especially when there's so much more in that general area to see (Sedona, Flagstaff, etc).
There is a road that runs close to the site. (Your street to your house close.) It is constantly being patrolled by Ministry of Defense security vehicles due to there being a high security military base nearby (can't think of which one at the moment)
A bunch of miltary installations South on the Salibury Plain
And Avebury is not far from Stonehenge. Bigger footprint/area but smaller stones, 30 years ago at least you could walk among the stones. I assume it’s the same and also assume it’s much less crowded than Stonehenge. I recommend doing both on the same day.
A popular truck stop, where you can pick a stone, any stone, without judgment or labels.
Holland is a fine historian of the Ancient and Hellenistic periods. Wonderful, vivid writer.
I've mentioned his book "In the Shadow of the Sword" about the development of Islam here.
Snow IIRC is the younger of two Brit military historians who had a series of battlefield shows some years ago.
I have no opinion on Stonehenge but I do watch all the documentaries. My wife has been there and wants to travel more in Britain but I'm more a continentalist myself.
Perhaps if they were to paint the stones in bright colors it would enhance the experience.
"Like our host I think travel is generally overrated, but one experience that blew my socks off was seeing the Grand Canyon. I've told friends many times that photos can't do it justice. Also touristy but you have to stand there to grasp the scale of that place."
50 years ago, I put Grand Canyon at the top of places I wanted to see. Now, I still haven't seen it, though I've been to many other national parks. I've been to Arches and Death Valley 3 times (each). Something keeps me away from Grand Canyon, a sense that you can't get there.
I'm aware of the "big and small" effect (as I said in the post). But should you go somewhere just to get a sense of the size of something? It doesn't overcome my resistance to overcrowded places.
Biggest disappointment: Mount Rushmore. The heads are big, but the viewing platform is so far away you might as well just gaze at a postcard.
What's the most disappointing tourist attraction in the world? My bet is the Mona Lisa. People come from all over just to be disappointed. Is there anyone on earth who doesn't know that catching a distant glimpse of that portrait is going to be disappointing? But still they come.....Those Aztec and Mayan monuments were sites of mass murder. The Mayans had a particular penchant for torturing babies to death. Kind of ghoulish going to such places. I'd rather see the Mona Lisa......We don't know all that much about Stonehenge and it early builders. I guess that's part of the mystery and the appeal. I bet the more we know about it, then the less appealing it will be. Primitive man was more in touch with his reptilian brain and all its darkness than with the sunlight of the solstice.
Here's what Bill Bryson wrote in "The Road to Little Dribbling":
"When I first came to Stonehenge in the early 1970s, you were still allowed to wander among the stones, to touch them and lounge against them and perch upon them. Soon afterward, however, that practice was stopped in the interests of preservation and everyone was made to stay on an outer encircling path, which is clearly a shame... Most people travel to the Stonehenge circle from the visitor center on a conveyance called a land train, but a discerning few elect to walk—a much better option because it gives you a chance to settle into the landscape and get a sense of the spaciousness of Salisbury Plain. You see the stones for the first time from about a half mile away and below you as you emerge from a stand of trees at the top of a long, low hill. At first sight, they seem surprisingly modest, dinky even... And it actually takes no effort at all to be struck silent by the beauty and perfect majesty of it. You realize at once that this is one of the most beautiful and extraordinary things ever created by humans, and it is all the more remarkable for being totally without precedent.... Trudging back up the long, low hill, I wondered idly what the builders of Stonehenge would have created if they’d had bulldozers and big trucks for moving materials and computers to help them design. What would they have created if they had had all the tools we have? Then I crested the brow of the hill with a view down to the visitor center, with its café and gift shop, its land trains and giant parking lot, and realized I was almost certainly looking at it."
In my opinion Zion is a more beautiful national park than the Grand Canyon.
I remember a Monty Pythonesque routine where some ancient Britons we're comparing Roman and British achievements. One of them offers Stonehenge. Another replies, "Stonehenge Stonehenge all that money spent and it still doesn't fly!"
"You see the stones for the first time from about a half mile away and below you as you emerge from a stand of trees at the top of a long, low hill. At first sight, they seem surprisingly modest, dinky even... And it actually takes no effort at all to be struck silent by the beauty and perfect majesty of it."
I wouldn't be surprised if this is the most stirring vantage point of the site, and one not amenable to a picture.
I have seen Stonehenge from the highway and walked around Avebury. Also out that way are Salisbury Cathedral, Glastonbury, Wells (town and Minster), and Bath. All well worthwhile. (It helps in Glastonbury to find a little witchery amusing and to be somewhat into Arthurian legend.)
“ What's the most disappointing tourist attraction in the world? My bet is the Mona Lisa.”
That’s the one you need to see in person so you can grasp how small it is.
I recommend avoiding seeing any work of art that’s behind glass, like ML is. You can’t really see it.
Visited Stonehenge in summer 67 and remember playing with my siblings among the stones with few other visitors present. Also visited Salisbury Cathedral then, which would seem to be a better recommendation than Durham.
Flew over Grand Canyon many times for work without visiting. But visited Canyonlands NP. Same canyon without the crowds.
Also visited Louvre in 1970 outside tourist season, before the Mona Lisa was a mob scene.
The David, even behind ropes with "no photos" signs, is magnificent. The piazza in Florence with Perseus holding the Medusa's head, just another statue parked on the stairs, is also astonishing. Places with stories interest me more than places with scenery.
The way to see the Grand Canyon is by mule down to Phantom ranch and back the next day. No scoffing about its size after that.
"You get the feeling, yes, there it is, looking exactly like all the pictures I've seen. Maybe it's a bit of a surprise to see that it's bigger or smaller than it seemed from the picture. And if it's something you thought would give you a magical mystical experience, you're least likely to get it if the place is a popular tourist attraction."
This resonates with me. We recently visited England and decided on places other than Stonehenge, largely because it somehow felt as if we'd already seen it and didn't want to deal with the crowes.. We found places outside of Bath and Penzance to be quite striking and to our liking. A woman we met who was doing a coastal walk in Cornwall told us about several neolithic sites that were worth seeing. Other, lesser known places are also appealing: Ales Stenar in southern Sweden is one of those. My thoughts jibe with what Christopher stated at 9:59, in that using your imagination can help 'get you back in time.' I had that experience in Flanders Fields, walking in the areas where trenches of WW1 had been. It was almost spooky. Also agree with what others have said about the Grand Canyon: it brought me to tears the first time I saw it, in 2016.
We were there in 85. Not very crowded, but mildly disappointing because of the barriers. There were then frequent confrontations with "druids" at the site, so security was constant if low-key.
I'd recommend Salisbury Cathedral, Yorkminster, and Bath.
We were on bicycles, and joined English Heritage for the discounts. My recollection is that their locations were always slightly disappointing.
Greece, especially Mycenae, Corinth, and Knossos, was far more engaging.
Anne, that's a fabulous Bryson quote!
("You take in York, you take in Durham, you take in Hadrian’s Wall, Hexham — you get into the Borders, Edinburgh, Kelso, Stirling Castle. I think that trip is probably stronger, the strongest in the isles. I think I would suggest people go to Durham Cathedral rather than Stonehenge")
This is good advice, and worth doing if you haven't been there. Some places very popular of course, but the cathedrals are big enough to enjoy even on busy days, Hadrian's Wall not too crowded in my experience, then you have the walkable dales nearby, Edinburgh is great even with crowds, and you can always give Stirling a miss on your way to the Highlands if too cheezy for you. Circle back via the Lake District if you're ambitious. So good and varied that even Althouse might enjoy it, if just for the vistas alone.
Not big on travel or tourist attractions, but the baptistry, duomo, and leaning tower in Pisa gets my vote for the delta between expectations and reality. All that white marble in a lovely green field. I'm a Galileo fan so I admit to bias.
If you ever are lucky enough to get the perfect combination of weather and peak cherry blossoms, a walk around the Jefferson memorial and the tidal basin is about as good as it gets.
The "magical, mystical, experience" is found within the visitor.
Getting culture, a poem.
1. Regarding Stonehenge -- I fear that a lot of the commenters here went to Stonehenge, but left their immaginations at home. This is a huge construction by people who lived 4 millenia ago. Built of stones somehow transported long distances. Think about that! Sure, it would be nice to be able to wander among the stones, it would be nice if you were the only tourists, but LOOK at what those prehistoric people built! I was there in 2013 with my three grandchildren. I will always remember it, and I hope they do, too.
2. The Grand Canyon -- I was there in 1960 (I was 17). My buddy and I hiked from the North Rim to the Colorado River, where we camped. The next day, my buddy had foot problems and took the mule train up to the South Rim, but I walked out on my own. After 62 years, I still remember that as one of my best ever days (even though -- or perhaps BECAUSE -- I thought there was a nontrivial risk that I would die on the trail). Althouse: Not for you now, and I will never think of doing it again. But for others, do it (with good hiking shoes).
What is this, spinal tap?
Nobody goes there; it's too crowded.
@The Drill SGT: That's a good list. I would also put York Minster no. 1. The city of York is a wonderful place to spend some time as are Bath and Chester. If I ever get back to England I want to go to Oxford and Cambridge.
I would also add the Roman fort of Vindolanda along Hadrian's Wall and the Churchill War Rooms at Whitehall in London.
I was at Stonehenge in 1980 and it was great seeing something so iconic. But I think I enjoyed just as much visiting the Castlerigg stone circle above Keswick in the Lake District.
We visited the Grand Canyon in the dead of winter, when it was very cold and there were no crowds. We drove in on the relatively flat high plain on the South side. Had no real sense what to expect, but were sort of wondering where the canyon was as we drove into the park area, which was scrubby high plains.
A sign said "Overlook" or "viewing area." we parked the car and walked down a path through the scrubby trees. Oh. My. God.
There is a sense of absolute hugeness that overwhelms. Canyons upon canyons in a defined space that is so large that it couldn't possibly be that big. but it is.
We did some hiking, but spent a whole lot of time just gazing out into the silent immensity and watching the colors change with the sun. Like most of the visitors.
I tend to avoid the big tourist places, and prefer getting off the beaten path. But the GC more than lives up to the hype.
I visited Stonehenge in 1992 - barriers already in place. What I remember best is driving onto the Salisbury plain and seeing the stones from a distance, stubby teeth sticking up out of the earth - that was magical. This clearly human-made construction, like nothing modern, like nothing natural - it was like seeing into someone else's dream.
Sure, I'd seen any number of pictures. But I was happy and awed to see it myself. Perhaps my problem (if it is one) is lack of imagination: I don't get the same thrill, chill, frisson from a picture that I do from personal experience.
On that same trip we went to Glastonbury Tor. It was a lovely day, sunny, some cottony clouds casting occasional shadows and giving depth to the landscape... until we stepped through the gate to climb the Tor. As soon as we did that, the clouds began to draw together. By the time we reached the roofless, ruined church at the top, the sky was black, the wind was whipping, and rain was pelting down. We huddled against the wall of the church for a minute, threw up our hands in surrender, and started back down.
The sun came out the moment we exited the gate at the bottom.
I was chatting with some friends just yesterday about visiting megaliths and other historic sites. One of my friends and I had the opportunity, while on a work layover in Micronesia, to kayak around Nan Madol (the "Venice of the Pacific"). It's an amazing spot with giant basalt stones in excess of 20 tons. No one can figure out how they were moved and placed.
It's sad about Stonehenge, but there really are hundreds, if not thousands of spots like this.
Also, as gilbar said, there are places like Shiloh which warrant visiting and contemplation. As touristy as it can be for a Civil War site, Gettysburg is still worth visiting.
As a young boy, I had the good fortune to live in Hawai'i - my friend lived in a house on Ford Island, in the middle of Pearl Harbor - we could put our fingers in the bullet holes in his house. Another friend and I used to sail Pearl Harbor, right over the Arizona and Utah. You could see oil still leaking out from those ships and rising to the top. Back then, Hanauma Bay still had living coral and the water was clear of sediment. Today, I'd recommend going to a place like Chuuk - Truk Lagoon, where you can dive amongst the Japanese wrecks.
We went to Stonehenge after it had been roped off, and still found it spectacular. My brother in law had photos of himself there as a child, climbing on the rocks.
When we went to Cambodia in 2007, you could climb all over the rocks and touch the carvings at Angkor Wat (and all the ruins, actually) and I wonder if that's still the way it is, or if it has been more roped off like Stonehenge.
I'm not the bucket list kind of person, but if I was, this would not be on it. It wouldn't even make the top ten of the UK. It would only be slightly ahead of the Blarney Stone. I can't see myself spending more than 15 minutes there. Whereas, I could spend all day at Angkor Wat. One can talk about the historical significance as the reason to see Stonehenge, but what if it were just one stone laying flat on the ground? Would the desire to see it still be there?
Mt. Rushmore is another sure miss for me. I thought the Grand Canyon might be, but it is completely different in experience. You cannot appreciate it in the two dimensional world of photos and video.
I'm not the bucket list kind of person, but if I was, this would not be on it. It wouldn't even make the top ten of the UK. It would only be slightly ahead of the Blarney Stone. I can't see myself spending more than 15 minutes there. Whereas, I could spend all day at Angkor Wat. One can talk about the historical significance as the reason to see Stonehenge, but what if it were just one stone laying flat on the ground? Would the desire to see it still be there?
Mt. Rushmore is another sure miss for me. I thought the Grand Canyon might be, but it is completely different in experience. You cannot appreciate it in the two dimensional world of photos and video.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा