EDITOR'S LOG Last spring our member W.E. Mansley wrote (in a letter published in SH31) , saying " it slowly dawned on me that you had other activities that helped create the magazine." Well , indeed , we do. And it is the commitment to those activities that binds us together and makes SEA HISTORY what some of us call it-the journal of a cause in motion. Mr. Mansley said we should devote a whole issue to what our aims and accomplishments are, " with pictures of your operations, work locations , etc." Others have let us know we ought to share the joy a little more-the "joy in the work," in W.R. Grace's memorable phrase-so that people can know better what the National Society is and does. We don't feel it right to devote a whole issue to the work of the Society- too much else would have to be let fall by the wayside, including projects that may depend on us for timely awareness , and books that need readers, and stories that need telling . But there is a project we think it's come time to present, and accordingly we invite you aboard the Wavertree, the big square rigger in New York's South Street Seaport Museum-an unusual and important " work location ." In this issue we bring you a report on the wider concerns of the World Ship Trust from Frank Carr, who also contributes the inimitable introduction to Mike Badham's memorable and well studied Thames barge story. It is good to know that at the head of our worldwide interest in historic ships we have Frank Carr who went to sea in such ships, and who maintains today a lively and seamanlike concern with working craft and working people. On this page we publish a bit of reflective thinking by Revell Carr (no relation , that we know, to Frank). May we urge some reflection on what he says. In a future SEA HISTORY we shall have more to say on the principles with which he is concerned and on the problems and opportunities of mixed cultural commercial development of our city waterfronts. And we shall come back to the New York Harbor Curatorship, some of whose concerns were taken up in our last. Mel Hardin of Staten Island, who organized Sea Day (SH33 :18-19) is working on the Noble Studio Barge, and on an Intrepid assignment-and that's not all.
*
*
*
*
*
As I write, the year-end appeal for SEA HISTORY , an appeal to assure that it has a future , is about to be launched . I hope all who read it will respond as generously as you can . The generosity of our members is what has brought us where we are, and that generous spirit alone can assure the PS future of our work together. SEA HISTORY, WINTER 1984-85
THE TIME IS NOW: For the Ships, for Maritime Preservation throughout the Country By J. Revell Carr The Third Maritime Preservation Confer- local history and I think your point of inence of the National Trust for Historic tegrating it into these developments is a Preservation was held October 25-27 at great incentive to museums and developers. Baltimore, Maryland. Over 100 pres- I think that can do part of the job we have ervationists, museum people and ship to do to educate. stewards debated policy in maintaining Not a lot has been said in support of the standards and determining business and South Street effort today. But there is a political strategies. At the end ofthe final truism in what Peter Niell said wearing the session, devoted to the uses and abuses of South Street hat, and that is " risk." There's commercial water/ront development, risk for the preservationist , there's risk for Revell Carr of Mystic, conference chair- the developer. That risk is an element of all man, summed up where he thought the these projects and we've got to be aware of discussions had been leading. it. There is no guarantee that our projects I think I'm going to have to sum this up and it's going to take me back to a couple of points I'd like to make; one, a point that Peter Stanford raised. He was saying : " Don't hire someone else to come and do your job." It takes us back to the selfreliance that this maritime heritage is built on , we have to rely on ourselves and this is an instance where we've got to rely on ourselves. We can't look to someone else to do it; not the Trust , not the government. We've got to use our wit, our imagination , our creativity to communicate our message. Certainly if the Trust can help steer and influence resources, it will do that, but we, each of us with our own projects , are going to have to do the very best we can to communicate our needs and to generate our resources. So we must look to ourselves. The " real thing" was another point that Peter Stanford made. I hope that Neil Cossons' story relating the reaction of the person at St. Katharine's dock in London is not reflective of our public here or in England. In saying that the historic vessels are not important and that the visitors only needed some kind of masts and yards as "window dressing," the person at St. Katharine's was doing his visitors a discredit. We have a perceptive public that is interested in.the authenticity of our vessels. We have witnessed the response to the real thing and we have seen a discriminating public react negatively to maritime projects in Atlantic City and other locations when something isn't being done right. So we should look for the real thing and that is something we owe to our public. In Peter Brink's points on Galveston , the word compromise was used. That's not a dirty word . We're living with it. It's a nicer word when it's phrased "joint planning." That joint planning must produce value for both aspects of an issue- both ends of the spectrum . And a very important point was made on the homogenized waterfront. If you were taken blindfolded to Halifax or Quincy Market or South Street or here in Baltimore and the blindfold was taken off, you would have a hard time figuring out where you were if you were inside one of those markets. Look for that distinction that is the
will succeed . And in Mr. Millspaugh's comments about Baltimore, mentioning the word "attractions" : there are attractions here, the things that we as maritime preservationists are responsible for are attractions. I think the key is the quality of the attractions. I worry about the old fish market here. I worry that they're looking for bids as to what kind of attraction is going to go in there. It's too bad that the "attraction" isn't the fish market. We've heard a number of important points : We do need the preservation standards, we do need the priorities. They apply just as much to the waterfront as they do to what's afloat. And throughout this conference came the question of people-talk about giving people what they want. It's our job to make people aware of what they ought to learn . A lot of them don't know. They don't know enough to know what is important about their maritime history. It's our job as educators , in all the forms we do it , to educate, enlighten and make them aware and make it as exciting and as interesting as it can possibly be. Find a way to communicate. Out of today's sessions I think we saw the opportunity to harness the energies and enthusiasms generated by our revitalized waterfronts, to carry out, to fund , to provide for the research , the scholarship and preservation that is needed , and to enable us to bring that to the people. I just wanted to comment that the waterfront in Baltimore has not been overly gentrified. Neil Cossons and I , last night watched a rat walk along the pier and he was alive and well. We thought for a moment he was on a string and might go by every hour on the hour but we don't think that's the case, so at least the wharf rats are still in existence here. The final point evident throughout this whole conference: You are involved , stay involved , get other people involved. It takes us back to self reliance. l#'ve got to do it. Assume responsibility. Let's carry on the work . And the point of the ships not having time is absolutely correct. The time is now. For the ships, for maritime preservation throughout the country. So it's time to get out and go to work. .ti
3