Alicia Farmer/Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
Philip D’Anieri is the author of "The Appalachian Trail: A Biography."

Q&A with Philip D’Anieri, author of ‘The Appalachian Trail: A Biography’

Author Philip D’Anieri talks about his book “The Appalachian Trail: A Biography” and how “we wind up asking new and different things from nature.”

In the 84 years since its completion, the Appalachian Trail has exemplified the power of nature and nurture: We take care of the wilderness, and it repays us by feeding our souls and imaginations. Philip D’Anieri, an urban planning lecturer at the University of Michigan, explores its history in “The Appalachian Trail: A Biography.” He recently spoke with the Monitor. 

Could you describe the Appalachian Trail and why it’s such a touchstone in American culture?
The trail runs roughly 2,100 miles over the Appalachian ridgeline from Maine to Georgia, over the highest land it can find wherever possible. When you’re on the trail, it’s practically endless: It feels like this portal into another world. These two qualities attract people whether they’ve hiked it or not. It’s so different from what’s around us in our day-to-day lives, and it invites you in for as long as you’re willing to experience it. 

What has made it such a success?
The mountains are a couple of hours’ drive – and sometimes not even that – from the metropolitan areas of the East Coast. There was a huge population seeking an outdoor getaway, and a large pool of volunteers available to get the trail built.

 

Mariner Books

You’re an urban planning specialist. What drew you to write about the trail?
Part of it was just a curiosity about “How did that get there?” But there’s a big component of planning in the trail’s history as well. The inventor of the trail, regional planner Benton MacKaye, was very interested in the balance between city, town, and country. In his imagination, the trail was part of a larger whole. I try to explore this connection. 

What surprised you?
The diversity of landscapes the trail travels through is really intriguing. Yes, there’s remote wilderness and gorgeous mountaintop vistas. But there are also small-town main streets, and farmers’ fields, and even highway bridges. The trail reflects the complexity of the terrain it passes over, which to me makes it an even more interesting place.

What does the trail tell us about our evolving approach to nature?
What really stuck out to me is how many different versions of “nature” there are, and how much they’ve shifted over time. We often talk about nature as though it is permanent and timeless, and that’s why it offers such an attractive escape. But as our everyday world changes, so do the things we want to escape from. We wind up asking new and different things from nature.

How has this idea played out?
In the early 20th century when the trail got started, experiencing nature had an almost patriotic connotation. Camping was seen as a way to recapture the pioneer spirit, and outdoor life was seen as a kind of national renewal. By the 1960s and ’70s, that idea had been turned almost completely on its head. Spending time in nature was an act of protest, a separation from the mainstream, an attempt to find something real that had nothing to do with conventional American society. Now, the outdoors is something else again, a kind of backdrop that people use to build out their online identities.

What should people understand about the trail and its history?
It takes a lot of work to create and protect such a valuable resource. From the individual volunteers clearing pathway in the 1920s all the way up to the organizations that manage it in the present day, the trail doesn’t just happen. Yes, it’s a natural wonder, but it’s also a big and complex piece of park infrastructure, and it can only happen with committed people putting in long hours and making difficult decisions.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Q&A with Philip D’Anieri, author of ‘The Appalachian Trail: A Biography’
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Books/2021/0825/Q-A-with-Philip-D-Anieri-author-of-The-Appalachian-Trail-A-Biography
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe