Menu
Another reason to hate the French
Officials fell trees inscribed by US soldiers who fought for France
Historic ‘name trees’ bore thousands of carvings
Historians hope to save the few remaining trees after 150 were felled
By Adam Sage in Saint Pierre de Varengeville-Duclair
The names “Thomas and Dorothy” were carved in the bark of one trunk. Another said “Bob and Carma”. Other trees were marked with soldiers’ home states - Iowa, Maine or Alabama - and several bore hearts and the names or initials of a wife or girlfriend.
The beech trees of Saint Pierre de Varengeville-Duclair forest bore a poignant testimony to the D-Day landings for more than six decades. Thousands of American soldiers stationed there after the liberation of Normandy spent their spare hours with a knife or bayonet creating a lasting reminder of their presence.
Although the trees grew and the graffiti swelled and twisted, this most peculiar memory of one of the 20th century’s defining moments remained visible - until now. Amid bureaucratic indifference and a dispute between officials and the forest owner, most of the trees have been felled, chopped up and turned into paper.
Claude Quétel, a French historian and Second World War specialist, was horrified when he discovered what he called a catastrophe and a shameless act. “It is a typically French failing to wipe out the traces of the past,” he told The Times. “I am indignant.”
Expert View
"To cut down and pulp 150 living monuments is a small but telling act of vandalism"
Ben MacIntyre
Losing such moving monuments is vandalism
Locals are calling for the few “name trees” that still stand to be classified as historic monuments and saved from the same fate. “It should have been done a long time ago,” said Nicolas Navarro, the curator of a Second World War museum in the grounds of his family’s 13th-century Château du Taillis near by. “It’s sad and pathetic that it wasn’t.”
The trees surrounded land in the heart of Saint Pierre de Varengeville-Duclair forest, near Rouen in Normandy, which was once home to a US army camp named after the Twenty Grand brand of cigarettes. It was one of nine cigarette camps - along with Pall Mall, Old Gold, Philip Morris, Chesterfield, Lucky Strike, Home Run, Wings and Herbert Tareyton - used by troops needing treatment or waiting to be sent elsewhere. They were places of calm between the D-Day landings and the Ardennes, the Siegfried Line or the Pacific.
Camp Twenty Grand, set up in September 1944 and closed in February 1946, had tents for 20,000 US soldiers as well as a few hundred German prisoners. Some of the Americans stayed weeks, others months, bringing chocolate, fruit and parties to a French population emerging from the rigour of Nazi occupation.
Mr Navarro’s museum contains a collection of the objects which caused amazement among the Normans: Craig Martin toothpaste, Nescafé, Coca-Cola bottles and a Durex. The soldiers left broken hearts, peach stones - which were planted to give the region its first peach trees - and their graffiti.
“Basically, they spent their time carving their names into the trees with knives and bayonets,” Mr Navarro said. “It became a real fad at Twenty Grand because thousands did it.”
He described the beech trees as one of the finest Second World War souvenirs left in Normandy. But Les Arbres des Noms - most of which stood along a small, winding road in the middle of the forest - were deemed unsafe by local officials. They ordered Patrice Robin, 79, who owns the land, to prune branches overhanging the road. “I said no at first,” he said. “But they threatened to take action against me.”
It costs about €800 (£630) to prune a beech tree, but only about €200 to cut it down. Mr Robin chose the cheaper option. “It’s complete madness - but I couldn’t do anything else.”
Mr Navarro said that more than 150 trees were felled last year, a destruction that went unnoticed beyond the district for months. He is determined now to preserve the ones that remain.
Link: Article
This message has been edited 1 time(s).
Replies to: Another reason to hate the French
Thread Level: 2
Fuck the French
(no message)
Thread Level: 3
That's sort of a goal of mine, I suppose. Or an exhortation meant for me?
(no message)
Thread Level: 2
It sucks, but the guy engaged in a rational thought process
He couldn't afford the 150x$800 to prune the trees, but he could the 150X$200 to chop them down. Of course, if "action" against him meant a $40 fine, then he is a major tool. But France is full of douchebaggery, so it probably means that he would have forfeited his land to the govt for not pruining his trees, in which case, if I were a soldier, I'd say cut down my fucking tree and keep fighting old man.
Thread Level: 3
True. Read my response to CC
.
Link: Response
Thread Level: 4
As goof a reason as any to burn down that crap hole
(no message)
Thread Level: 2
The guy owns the land and the trees. Why hasn't your patriotic ass offered to buy them.
Does no one see the obvious in this? The man can do with what he wants with his land just like here in the good ol' USA.
Its not like this was a government sponsored memorial. This isn't vandalism its a man clearing his land. Its tragic that we are losing something as historic as this but that is where it ends.
Get off your complaining as and buy the damn things and the land before its gone if it that upsetting to you.
Thread Level: 3
Maybe because the farmer didn't call me and ask me to donate to saving the trees
or maybe it's because he did it without telling anyone he had planned on doing it. Did you even read the f'in article? The locals are already trying to get the land designated as a historical site. Another French sympathizer that can't take a freakin' joke in a subject line. Get over yourself.
And for the record, don't talk shit about someone's patriotism unless you know them personally.
This message has been edited 1 time(s).
Thread Level: 2
The French saved them for 60 years and the people who are working to save them are...
...that's right: French.
Put those trees over an oil field in the U.S. and they'd have been long gone.
It's not like we've got a spotless track record when it comes to this sort of thing:
War memorial vandalized for no apparent reason: http://www.kristv.com/Global/story.asp?S=6487659
War memorial vandalized apparently in hopes of salvaging copper: http://www.wyff4.com/news/16357259/detail.html?subid=10100246
Veteran's Day flag display destroyed: http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/2007/11/12/veterans-day-flag-memorial-destroyed-in-kc/
DUI driver took down a Doughboy memorial in Kentucky: http://www.columbiamagazine.com/index.php?sid=21767
One might be impressed that for 60 years the French preserved scratches left in beech trees by foreign soldiers. And one might be impressed that they still see the value in preserving the trees...which, let's face it, were really just vandalized by the soldiers. Not in the offensive sense that the American war memorials above were destroyed or desecrated, but these aren't exactly grave markers. This is Europe, and war is no stranger to these lands, so you can't reasonably expect every footprint or trace of foreign soldiers to be regarded with awe for all of eternity.
I wonder how many American tourists to Normandy even visited the trees. And, if they did or if they knew about them, did they pitch in to preserve them...or just thank the farmer for preserving them?
The destruction of 150 trees is probably the best thing that could have happened. To paraphrase the classic Zen koan: "What is the sound of 150 trees that continued to stand in the forest?" Now, at least, there's some attention directed at a monument that few, if any, Americans gave a crap about until it disappeared. This is a bigger loss for the French who live among this slice of history. For nearly all of America, we've lost something that we would have never known was there but for losing it.
Thread Level: 3
That justifies it.
(no message)
Thread Level: 3
All of the examples of American war memorials that were damaged or destroyed were done by vandals
The trees were ordered pruned by the local GOVERNMENT. The land owner could not afford to prune them, so he cut them down to avoid fines.
I didn't say all French were bad, just seems like they could have helped the land owner with the cost. What are you doing to help preserve the past while in France, CC?
Don't forget this quote:
"Claude Quétel, a FRENCH historian and Second World War specialist, was horrified when he discovered what he called a catastrophe and a shameless act. “It is a typically FRENCH failing to wipe out the traces of the past,”
This message has been edited 1 time(s).
Thread Level: 4
I think your point here cuts against your point before
The government said they needed to be pruned, not destroyed. Pruning is necessary to keep the trees alive. How is pruning them a bad thing?
The farmer, who could not afford the cost, cut them down, though with a heavy heart.
They actually did care. But these are trees that were scratched by soldiers 60 years ago. As war memorials and battle memorabilia go...this is purely a sentimental. It's not a tribute to fallen soldiers, it's not of strategic significance. It's the detritis of war. Considering what we're talking about, I think it's pretty damn amazing that the French preserved those trees for as long as they did.
As for you not saying that all French are culpable...read your subject line. I'm sure that it was partly tongue-in-cheek but it's the sort of reaction I'd say at least half of the posters here would fully subscribe to. I think the French did an amazing job for 60 years and I would submit to you that had these been tree scratchings of French soldiers in America...there'd be little to 0 outrage or remorse on the part of Americans. Had you not heard that they were cut down, you'd never have known -- let alone cared -- about the ones still standing. Now that you know and care, you can contribute to the pruning of these beech trees. So that's a good thing, n'est-ce pas?
As for my efforts towards saving history, have you seen the tax schedule in France? I just hope that my French (or U.S. for that matter) tax dollars are being spent on better things than some trees vandalized by soldiers 60 years ago. It was quaint that they were kept that long so that returning American GI's could visit them, but this is about as insignificant a piece of history as anything I can imagine. After 60 years -- and few of the soldiers still able to visit them, they've served their sentimental purpose And keep in mind that trees are organic...so the trees were going to die eventually. They were probably mature at the time they were carved, right? Then they were preserved 60 more years towards their ultimate demise. Cutting them down simply shaved off a few years (and probably not many if they had come to be a danger) from their ultimate peril.
Basically, I'm saying that I personally don't think this is worth wringing my hands over and to think that French people took care of these trees for as long as they did and they are the ones who are concerned about the felling of some of them....that's a testimonial to the French, not "another reason to hate the French." If people were to be seriously outraged with the French over this, it's yet another, disturbing example of how Americans are so quick to put symbolism over substance when it comes to matters of patriotism.
This message has been edited 1 time(s).
Thread Level: 5
At least YOU got the tongue in cheek part right.
I didn't say we need to go over and burn the Country to the ground. I simply chose a subject line w/a little humor. I made no reference to any part of the article in my original post, only quoted a French historian, in my reply to you, to make the point that even the French think it was a bad idea. SW made it sound like I was accusing some of treason against the US..
Thread Level: 5
Life's a beech.
(no message)
Thread Level: 4
Charlie's a well-known Vichy sympathizer.
(no message)
Thread Level: 3
Wow. Do you mean the French allowed trees to grow for 60 years?
Remarkable.