Thursday, June 3, 2010

Please do not remove that arch from the park

I haven't been to Arches for quite some time, so it was fun to go back with the boys and remember how beautiful it is.  I just can't get enough of the combination of red rocks and blue sky. 
For awhile Malachi found every small rock within a two-mile radius, and sat on each one.  Then for some reason he decided he was done with that, and kept insisting, "I don't NEED to west, Mommy."

Sam is convinced that the arch above (Landscape Arch) is going to fall pretty soon.  He felt a sense of Great Relief that we made it to the end of our hike with the arch still intact.  There has been an arch that's fallen recently (2008?).  But I think Landscape Arch has a couple hundred years left.

Daisy, no doubt invigorated by the archy atmosphere, threw herself into the spirit of the thing by constantly trying to arch herself out of her carrier. This picture doesn't do it justice, but she used our stomachs and chins as leverage to arch her back as completely as possible. She kept it up all day long.  We were afraid that when we drove out of the park, a ranger would stop us and say, "Excuse me, but you are not allowed to remove Arches from the park." And we'd have to leave her there.

I think this looks like a shot from an old Western movie: ominous music plays, and nervous townspeople scatter, as the camera pulls back to reveal the villain, Dirty Seb, striding into town.

We cooked dinner over a campfire (the campsites are really pretty) and let the boys climb around on the rocks. They loved that.  I watched them, called "Be Careful!" every couple minutes, waved every time they yelled "Look at me, Mommy!", and tried to keep myself from having a heart attack over how high they were.

Ky was quite pleased with himself for climbing this far.
I love this picture.  Two intrepid mountain climbers, striding fearlessly forward.

2 comments:

  1. Beautiful, beautiful shots. And children. Beautiful children. Mar, I am scanning all of the family photos I've taken over the years - some very reminiscent of these. But I have to tell you - I had to work with rolls of film only a few, choice shots before you were out, and then with printed photos, which have lost their luster over the years. And I didn't shoot anywhere near as beautifully as you and Gin do - maybe because I didn't have the luxury of taking 300 shots and choosing - or maybe not.

    The memories your kids will have, looking at these visual records of themselves - they will believe their lives were magic. And really, they pretty much are.

    One caveat - there are no pictures of me. I don't know when I was slim and when I was fat - I don't remember what my hair looked like or how long I've had the shirt I'm wearing now. And the kids? No shots of their mom during the grow up. They will miss those really bad when they're my age. So hand the camera to Sam once in a while. Much as you might hate to.

    ReplyDelete
  2. K: No maybe about it: I'm _positive_ that the quantity of shots is why I'm able to get good ones. I'm learning more about lighting and composition simply by virtue of happy accidents (which I, slowly, attempt to re-create). I remember having to carefully nurse along your two available rolls of film, of course. Even when I was in London in college, digital cameras weren't the norm, and I struggled along with my mom's old camera, hoping the pictures would turn out; waiting to develop them to see. It's odd that the new technology became mainstream SO fast. Not just in my lifetime, but in my adulthood---the last 10-12 years, really.

    ReplyDelete