After the beach we went to Cedar Point County Park, which is also in East Hampton. This is a completely different sort of place from the usual attractions in that city. It is mainly a big campground with 1950s-ish facilities: charcoal pits, overgrown baseball fields with rusting backstops, playgrounds, metallic-flavored water fountains, picnic tables, etc. The picture below is the office where you check in. They show family movies, I presume outside, on Saturday night, which the ladies at the desk invited us to come back for; our stay in the area did not extend to that day however.
The park is situated on the north shore of the south fork of Long Island, on what I suppose would be called an inlet. The effect is of a large lake, as land is visible all around, including one decent-sized town with a large marina directly across, possibly Sag Harbor or part of Shelter Island, but I was not certain. It is a genuinely pleasant spot, and still the nearly exclusive domain of some remnant of a class that is middling in every way, a rarity in that part of the world. New York State, I understand, is famous for the quality of its parks among aficiondos of that sort of thing. While they show some signs of age--though that is no strike against them with me--the ones I have seen seem to be well designed to appeal to and accomodate city people who are looking for a taste of nature without desiring a struggle with it, which is about the level I am currently at. Garbage cans, snack and soda machines, restrooms (often 1930s-50s vintage, with radiators, bubble-shaped soap dispensers, paneled doors on the toilet stalls, checked tiled floors, etc), and trails devoid of roots and stones and poison ivy are plentiful and placed at strategic intervals. You won't find any of this at a state park in Vermont or New Hampshire; there you are expected to bring your own drinks, carry all your trash out with you, tire yourself out with exercise and relieve yourself in the overgrowth off the trail. It is still not quite up to the level of hiking or bicycling in the Czech Republic or other parts of Europe, where two to three hours of such activity, and sometimes even one, inevitably leads you to a tavern, but it is near enough at least to arouse the association.
I had never been to the Natural History Museum myself. It has become something of an iconic site of New York childhood due to the homage paid it by the many New York children who grew up to write books and make movies and be generally sophisticated and important. The Catcher in the Rye is probably the most famous example, and even Malcolm X was shown hanging out in the African mammal gallery in the movie that was made about him. I would not be wholly astonished to discover that Lou Reed made a positive allusion to it somewhere. My children are probably a little young to be struck with any such kind of deep impression, and of course they are not New York City children anyway, but it is fun at least to pretend one is having some kind of exciting and meaningful experience, though I fear I do a very poor job of imitating the sort of people who do have such experiences. It was interesting that the children's favorite things in the museum were actually the old classics: the dinosaur skeletons (or the models/casts of them), the elephants, the models of various (American) Indian dwellings. Of the two older boys, one's style of museum-going is to race through the rooms as quickly as he can in order to make sure he is not missing anything and ask a lot of questions seemingly unrelated to what he is seeing (Is 92 minutes longer than an hour and a half?), while the other (the younger, actually) is more inclined to be attracted to the objects in front of him and make them subjects of his musings.
Theodore Roosevelt was apparently the guiding spirit of the building of this museum, which I had not known, and besides the over the top equestrian statue of the President dressed in armor and accompanied by an Indian on foot at his right hand (I am guessing there will never be such a monument of our present leader erected in New York) which stands in front of the museum, there are four stirring quotes of his on such topics as Manliness, Duty, Patriotism, and so forth, engraved on the walls in the main concourse which instantly arouse in one a sense of personal elevation quite apart from any intellectual analysis of the words themselves. This was my favorite part of the museum, though this concourse, as well as the rest of the place, was crammed with people (in the books the sensitive types are always depicted as wandering through the galleries alone, immersed in thought).
My least favorite part was the line for tickets--there is no fee, only "donations", though you have to declare to the ticket dispensers what you are donating, and I at was least informed that giving nothing is not permitted, though this seems a misuse of the word donation. I have been told by real New Yorkers and other reasonably cultivated people that all of the big museums in that city which have this donation policy have enough money to keep operating until my great-great-grandchildren's lifetimes and that the whole racket is an inside joke at the expense of the suburban boobies and earnest halfwits who fall for it. However true this may be, I have yet to find anyone who is going to let me pass myself off as exempt from donating on the grounds that I am in any way above the vulgar masses. While normally when I go to the bank, the grocery store, etc, I am the kind of creep who chooses what line to get in according to which one has the best-looking girl working at the end of it, on this occasion I was hoping, as I made my way through the maze to get to the ticket counter, that I would get one of the numerous unattractive or overweight people for this dreaded confrontation over the donation; but no, it was my fate to be directed to Miss New York 2007 herself, a swarthy, palpably hostile beauty, of a vaguely Latin though otherwise largely indeterminate ethnic origin. I appealed to her for guidance and she coolly informed me that the suggested donation for my party was $47. This seemed to me an absurd suggestion. Surely no one of sense is going to pay $47 for anything if he does not have to, quite apart from my determination not to appear too unsavvy to the great city people. I said, without adequate force however, that I wished to pay nothing. You have to pay something, I was told. I gave a very small donation--it was at the end of my trip, and I had not had much money to throw around to begin with--which I could not do with the effect of haughtiness, grandeur, whatever, that I was looking for. But really I couldn't have won, I don't think, short of sardonically throwing a $100 bill on the counter and telling them to keep the change, because they had pegged me for a bourgeois, and no spirit of finer stuff. If I had given 47, or 30, or 20, they'd have sneered at me, and I'd have sneered at myself as a sucker and been unable to have any fun from that point on, but being a skinflint without any justification--uncool provincial tourists devoid of sex appeal, the attitude is, should not expect to be allowed to do anything in New York without incurring some appropriate expense--I merely branded myself as pathetic. But I felt all right, I really did. I really believe now, as I slowly and imperceptibly grow ever so slightly mad, that there is some part of the melange of facts and ideas which constitutes New York, that I possess a real understanding of, which the cool people and the greatest artists and intellects are powerless to shatter utterly. I am eager to go back.
No comments:
Post a Comment