On Thru-Hiking and What It Is Not (to Me)
One of my life goals/dreams has for the longest time been to thru-hike the AT.
The ATC keeps a record of people who have hiked the ~2180 miles of the AT. It calls these people “2000-milers”, regardless of how they hiked the trail.
There are many different ways that people do it. Some do it in small sections in different years. Some (most) hike north from Springer Mountain in Georgia to (one of my favorite places on earth) Mt. Katahdin in Maine; others do that in reverse - which is actually a lot harder because of how yearly weather works out and because one has to start with some of the most difficult sections of the trail first. There are also “alternative” methods such as “flip-flopping” and “leap-frogging”.
The ATC defines a thru-hike as any trip completed in a single year, but even among thru-hikers, there is a lot of variation to what counts as a real thru-hike. Some don't consider flip-flops to be real thru-hikes, for example. Many leave the trail on weekends - or on Trail Days, AT hiking's major “holiday” - to stay at hotels, get showers, and buy gear.
When I say that I wish to thru-hike though, I really want to avoid hotels. I won't say that if you thru-hike using hotels that you are a cheater; people should “hike their own trail.” But for me personally, it would feel like cheating, like I hadn't really achieved my goal. Moreover, hotel-staying slows one down and severely increases the financial cost of hiking. I'm convinced I could hike the trail in four months, but weekend breaks would probably delay that to five.
The fact of the matter is that I am going to have to compromise if I ever wish to achieve this dream, because sadeyedartist is not a hiker. Most likely, for it ever to work, I would need to meet up with her periodically off trail - assuming that she herself would sort of be traveling north with me by car to various towns, creating art or visiting people, I suppose. More reasonable than this would probably be simply section hiking.
But the point of this entry is more my trying to figure out why it is that I don't feel like section-hiking or hotel-staying would count towards my full dream. What is going on in my mind psychologically?
In normal life, I'm obsessed with cleanliness. I'm always washing my hands; I take two showers most days; I won't open a bathroom door without a paper towel; I despise sweating; I hate arthropods. Why, then, am I content, if not delighted, to sweat buckets in insect-infested, shower-less forests?
I don't know.
I do know that it somewhat has to do with setting. Sweat isn't so bad when one is outside where it can evaporate and actually do what it was meant to do - cool one off - or when one can wear moisture-wicking clothing or hike shirtless - things one does not do on a regular basis in the typical work environment. The hiking part is enjoyable work, but it is still work; it is at the end of day that one cools down and relaxes. And it's not like I don't bathe when I hike. At end of day, I always wash off near some natural stream or in the rain, so I go to bed rather clean. And my hatred of insects isn't gone; it's just that if they invade my home, I will go out of my way to annihilate them, but in the wild, I am in their space - I just keep them away from me and my gear.
I think it has to do with almost becoming a part of nature. I love living in the city, but it can hardly be called a part of nature. It is a separate thing altogether. But on the trail, I don't want to be just a tourist; I want to become a part of it. Hotel stays kill that.
One could argue that even stopping by a town to grab food for the next two weeks of hiking from a local grocer could also be said to kill that. True, but I think it is a matter of degrees. I frankly cannot survive without purchasable food; I know nothing about how to survive on berries, and I will never kill an animal to eat. But I can certainly survive without a hotel stay.
There's just something - for me anyway - about knowing that I can survive for two weeks to a month easily with what I am carrying on my back. It reminds me of what things are actually necessary in life.
And it's odd; in my world view, I place man far above animals in importance (yet still holding that too many people underestimate them[1]), so why would I want to sometimes “return to nature”? I have no idea. Perhaps a vulgar example, but I think that most men will agree that it is wonderful to be able to “go” outdoors. That does not make any logical sense to me, but to be honest, I have to agree. And swimming in lakes in streams - provided they aren't covered with trash from human activity - beats swimming in a chlorine-infested pool.
Is all this a reminder to myself that in many ways mankind are just like animals? While that is probably a healthy viewpoint (if balanced), I'm not sure if that's why either.
Is it that to truly see the beauty of nature, I feel that I must temporarily join with it and be a part of it? This goes along with my tourist comment above, and currently it is why I think I may be so attracted to the idea of escaping away and hiking.
The ATC keeps a record of people who have hiked the ~2180 miles of the AT. It calls these people “2000-milers”, regardless of how they hiked the trail.
There are many different ways that people do it. Some do it in small sections in different years. Some (most) hike north from Springer Mountain in Georgia to (one of my favorite places on earth) Mt. Katahdin in Maine; others do that in reverse - which is actually a lot harder because of how yearly weather works out and because one has to start with some of the most difficult sections of the trail first. There are also “alternative” methods such as “flip-flopping” and “leap-frogging”.
The ATC defines a thru-hike as any trip completed in a single year, but even among thru-hikers, there is a lot of variation to what counts as a real thru-hike. Some don't consider flip-flops to be real thru-hikes, for example. Many leave the trail on weekends - or on Trail Days, AT hiking's major “holiday” - to stay at hotels, get showers, and buy gear.
When I say that I wish to thru-hike though, I really want to avoid hotels. I won't say that if you thru-hike using hotels that you are a cheater; people should “hike their own trail.” But for me personally, it would feel like cheating, like I hadn't really achieved my goal. Moreover, hotel-staying slows one down and severely increases the financial cost of hiking. I'm convinced I could hike the trail in four months, but weekend breaks would probably delay that to five.
The fact of the matter is that I am going to have to compromise if I ever wish to achieve this dream, because sadeyedartist is not a hiker. Most likely, for it ever to work, I would need to meet up with her periodically off trail - assuming that she herself would sort of be traveling north with me by car to various towns, creating art or visiting people, I suppose. More reasonable than this would probably be simply section hiking.
But the point of this entry is more my trying to figure out why it is that I don't feel like section-hiking or hotel-staying would count towards my full dream. What is going on in my mind psychologically?
In normal life, I'm obsessed with cleanliness. I'm always washing my hands; I take two showers most days; I won't open a bathroom door without a paper towel; I despise sweating; I hate arthropods. Why, then, am I content, if not delighted, to sweat buckets in insect-infested, shower-less forests?
I don't know.
I do know that it somewhat has to do with setting. Sweat isn't so bad when one is outside where it can evaporate and actually do what it was meant to do - cool one off - or when one can wear moisture-wicking clothing or hike shirtless - things one does not do on a regular basis in the typical work environment. The hiking part is enjoyable work, but it is still work; it is at the end of day that one cools down and relaxes. And it's not like I don't bathe when I hike. At end of day, I always wash off near some natural stream or in the rain, so I go to bed rather clean. And my hatred of insects isn't gone; it's just that if they invade my home, I will go out of my way to annihilate them, but in the wild, I am in their space - I just keep them away from me and my gear.
I think it has to do with almost becoming a part of nature. I love living in the city, but it can hardly be called a part of nature. It is a separate thing altogether. But on the trail, I don't want to be just a tourist; I want to become a part of it. Hotel stays kill that.
One could argue that even stopping by a town to grab food for the next two weeks of hiking from a local grocer could also be said to kill that. True, but I think it is a matter of degrees. I frankly cannot survive without purchasable food; I know nothing about how to survive on berries, and I will never kill an animal to eat. But I can certainly survive without a hotel stay.
There's just something - for me anyway - about knowing that I can survive for two weeks to a month easily with what I am carrying on my back. It reminds me of what things are actually necessary in life.
And it's odd; in my world view, I place man far above animals in importance (yet still holding that too many people underestimate them[1]), so why would I want to sometimes “return to nature”? I have no idea. Perhaps a vulgar example, but I think that most men will agree that it is wonderful to be able to “go” outdoors. That does not make any logical sense to me, but to be honest, I have to agree. And swimming in lakes in streams - provided they aren't covered with trash from human activity - beats swimming in a chlorine-infested pool.
Is all this a reminder to myself that in many ways mankind are just like animals? While that is probably a healthy viewpoint (if balanced), I'm not sure if that's why either.
Is it that to truly see the beauty of nature, I feel that I must temporarily join with it and be a part of it? This goes along with my tourist comment above, and currently it is why I think I may be so attracted to the idea of escaping away and hiking.