A BEAUTIFUL PLACE
Once more, Sharon and I missed the walk, being away with some small children. This means, of course, that I am having to make the commentary up. Usually that is helped by having the time of the photos available, so that I can at least get the images in the right order. No such luck, this time. I only have the time that the images were sent to me by Sue and Charlie. The timings indicate they did the walk in something under two minutes. In fact, because Sue sent me her photos before Charlie, it looks like they finished the walk before they started.
I do know that they started at Kilmorack Dam car park, so we can take it from there. Except, it isn't as simple as that.
Kilmorack is either the the Church of St Barr or the burial ground of young Marion. So take your choice from - Cill for Church, Mo for, of my, and Barr is Bharroc. St Bharroc is more commonly known as Finbar. Alternatively, Kill = Burial ground and Mhorac = Marion. Given that St Bharroc lived the bulk of his life in Ireland, apart from a wee pilgrimage to Rome, I tend to Marion. Nobody knows who Marion might have been. I don't suppose it matters, but it is unusual from me to come across two distinctly different suggestions for the root of a placename.
If you're still with me, we can start the walk now.
You'd never catch me doing a selfie on a walk.
Charlie clearly cannot get everyone to look at the camera. I know exactly how he feels. It is a special kind of hell being an artist.
He tried again, but even though he got more people in, Jacque found her shoes more interesting to look at than Charlie. What had Maureen and Hugh been up to when the first picture was taken?
This is Kilmorack Dam, which is the last, that is the lowest, dam on the Affric Beauly Hydro scheme. It was built in the early 1960's.
Off they went, keeping a close eye out for any stuff they might not want to step in on the way.
The sign on the next photo says Please don't drop poop bags in nature. Clearly some people cannot read. Or, they are making some sort of dirty protest. The current Lord Lovat apparently doesn't like riff raff walking around his estate and, perhaps, spoiling his enjoyment of the many picnic opportunities by the riverside. This has been a bit of a long running saga.
Perhaps both sides need to remember that we are only temporarily involved with the planet and we should be looking after it for the benefit of us all rather than a few.
After all - Property is theft.
For many years I had believed this to be something that Karl Marx had said, but, no it wasn't. He actually changed his mind and disagreed with this view as the violation against property caused by theft did, in itself, demand acceptance that property actually existed. I assume you followed that line of argument.
It was, in fact, originally said by the French Anarchist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in 1840. He later modified his view to say that property was also freedom, because you cannot separate bad from good. In effect, to do away with the notion of theft of property, would be to deny that property exists in the same way that to delete a debit from an account would be to deny the opposite credit elsewhere in the account. I'm sure Hugh would agree.
Proudhon was just echoing earlier thinkers on this matter. Even the Marquis de Sade had thought about this (among other things), saying that if you traced property rights back as far as you could, you arrive at the time when someone usurped the land from everyone else. When someone said, "This is Mine", they had, in effect, stolen it from the collective community.
So, Lord Lovat may be thought to be abusing his property rights, but they are rooted in the original theft. Similarly, those who drop litter and poo bags are as guilty of abusing property that belongs to us all. All it takes is a bit of respect on all sides.
You can tell it is raining and I have a bit of time on my hands!
Having had enough of all the hard thinking stuff, they headed inland away from the river.
Are these male and female horses, do you think? One has a pink coat and the other blue. Heavens, but this is another can of worms. Apparently the pink for girls and blue for boys thing is fairly new. All babies were originally dressed in white dresses - easy to bleach and dresses allowed for quick nappy changes. Pastel shades became popular and were interchangeable for boys and girls before the end of the First World War. It then went to blue for girls and pink for boys as pink was seen as a stronger colour and more suited to boys and blue was more dainty and better for girls. That all changed in the 1940's although it went out of fashion with Women's Liberation in the 60's. Like everything else it has come back round again.
Is it any wonder horses are confused?
Following in the footsteps of St Bhorrac or Marion they headed back to the river.
1 Comments:
Thanks for really interesting blog as usual
Post a Comment
<< Home