Skip to content

Prof. Boerner's Explorations

Thoughts and Essays that explore the world of Technology, Computers, Photography, History and Family.

Archive

Archive for December 6th, 2009
by Gerald Boerner

  

“If your pictures aren’t good enough, you’re not close enough.”
— Robert Capa

“The term accessories has come to include a host of photographic gadgets of questionable value…”
— Ansel Adams, The Camera

“Senseless photographers practice random acts of beauty; intelligent photographers practice consistent acts of selflessness.”
— Anonymous

“People think that all cameramen do is point the camera at things, but it’s a heck of a lot more complicated than that!”
— Larry in Groundhog Day

“I shutter to think how many people are underexposed and lacking depth in this field.”
— Rick Steves, travel guide and author

“To visualize an image (in whole or in part) is to see clearly in the mind prior to exposure, a continuous projection from composing the image through the final print.”
— Ansel Adams, The Camera

“…the most grandiose result of the photographic enterprise is to give us the sense that we can hold the whole world in our heads—as an anthology of images.”
— Susan Sontag, On Photography

“Just as a fisherman cannot catch fish unless his line is in the water, a wildlife photographer cannot shoot great wildlife images unless he or she is out there with camera in hand and the knowledge of what to do then the ‘magnificent moment’ occurs.”
— George H. Harrison, in Magnificent Moments: The World’s Greatest Wildlife Photographs

  

Using Photographic Filters: General Introduction

LensFilter-001 In photography and videography, a filter is a camera accessory consisting of an optical filter that can be inserted in the optical path. The filter can be a square or oblong shape mounted in a holder accessory, or, more commonly, a glass or plastic disk with a metal or plastic ring frame, which can be screwed in front of the lens or clipped onto the lens.

Filters allow added control for the photographer of the images being produced. Sometimes they are used to make only subtle changes to images; other times the image would simply not be possible without them.

The negative aspects of using filters, though often negligible, include the possibility of loss of image definition if using dirty or scratched filters, and increased exposure required by the reduction in light transmitted. The former is best avoided by careful use and maintenance of filters, while the latter is a matter of technique; it usually will not be a problem if planned out properly, but in some situations filter use is impractical.

Many filters are identified by their Wratten number.

Filters are one of the least expensive accessories you can use to make big changes in the way your pictures look. Obviously, digital photography has changed the use of filters and photo-editing software has eliminated the need for using many of the filters. For the purposes of this discussion, we’ll limit the scope of our information to filters that can be used to alter your photographs, be they digital, color, or B/W film.

Filters come in two basic forms. The most common is a transparent disk of colored glass or plastic that is mounted in a metal frame and screwed into the threads on the front of your lens. What size filter you choose depends on the maker of the lens and the lens you are putting it on. They come in sizes ranging from 48mm to 77mm. Look on the front of your lens and you should see a number like 52, 56, 58, etc. That is your filter size. The other common type is typically part of a filter system where you attach a mount to the front of your lens and the filter is often a square of colored plastic which slides into a slot in the mount. Cokin is probably the best known filter system of this type.

Uses of filters in photography

Filters in photography can be classified according to their use:

  • Clear and ultraviolet
  • Color correction, also called "color conversion" or "white balance correction"
  • Color separation, also called Color Subtraction
  • Contrast enhancement
  • Infrared
  • Neutral Density, including the Graduated ND filter and Solar filter
  • Polarizing
  • Special Effects of various kinds, including
    • Graduated color, called color grads
    • Cross screen and Star diffractors
    • Diffusion and contrast reduction
    • Sepia tone
    • Spot
    • Close-up or macro diopters, and split diopters or split focus
Clear and ultraviolet

Clear filters, also known as window glass filters or optical flats, are completely transparent, and (ideally) perform no filtering of incoming light at all. The only use of a clear filter is to protect the front of a lens.

UV filters are used to reduce haziness created by ultraviolet light. A UV filter is mostly transparent to visible light, and can be left on the lens for nearly all shots. UV filters are often used for lens protection, much like clear filters. A strong UV filter, such as a Haze-2A or UV17, cuts off some visible light in the violet part of the spectrum, and so has a pale yellow color; these strong filters are more effective at cutting haze, and can reduce purple fringing in digital cameras. Strong UV filters are also sometimes used for warming color photos taken in shade with daylight-type film.

While in certain cases (such as harsh environments) a protection filter may be necessary, there are also downsides to this practice. Arguments for the use of protection filters include:

  • If the lens is dropped, the filter may well suffer scratches or breakage instead of the front lens element.
  • One can clean the filter frequently without having to worry about damaging the lens coatings; a filter scratched by cleaning is much less expensive to replace than a lens.
  • If there is blowing sand the filter may protect the lens from abrasion from sand
  • Some lenses like Canon’s L series lenses require the use of a filter to complete the weather sealing

And arguments against their use include:

  • Adding another element degrades image quality due to aberration and flare.
  • It may reduce the use of lens hoods, since threading a lens hood on top of the clear filter might cause vignetting on some lenses, and since not all clear filters would even have threads allowing a hood to be attached.
  • If the ring of the filter is struck in a drop it may shatter the filter and cause scratches to the front element rather than a bend in the filter ring of the lens barrel

Additionally, users of UV filters must be careful about the quality of such filters. There is a wide variance in the performance of these filters with respect to their ability to block UV light. Also in lower quality filters, problems with autofocus and image degradation have been noted.

Color correction

A major use is to compensate for the effects of lighting not balanced for the film stock’s rated color temperature (usually 3200 K for professional tungsten lights and 5500 K for daylight): e.g., the 80A blue filter used with daylight film corrects the orange/reddish cast of household tungsten lighting, while the 85B used with tungsten film will correct the bluish cast of daylight. Color correction filters are identified by numbers which sometimes vary from manufacturer to manufacturer. The use of these filters has been greatly reduced by the widespread adoption of digital photography, since color balance problems are now often addressed with software after the image is captured, or with camera settings as the image is captured.

80a_comparison Although the 80A filter is mainly used to correct for the
excessive redness of tungsten lighting, it can also be used
to oversaturate scenes that already have blue. The photo
on the left was shot with a polarizer, while the one on
the right was shot with a polarizer and an 80A filter.

Fluorescent lighting provides another problem for color film/slides. While they come in a variety of different types, all fluorescent bulbs lack sufficient warm reds, yellows, and orange light while having excess green. For digital camera users, you simply adjust your white balance for the correct color temperature. For color film users, a filter is required. If you’re shooting with daylight film, you’ll need a FLD filter. A FLB filter is useful when shooting type B tungsten film under fluorescent lighting. Unfortunately, these filters are only half the battle and professionals generally resort to CC filters (color compensating). Which filters to use depends upon the color mix of that particular fluorescent bulb.

Color subtraction

Color subtraction filters work by absorbing certain colors of light, letting the remaining colors through. They can be used to demonstrate the primary colors that make up an image. They are perhaps most frequently used in the printing industry for color separations, and again, use has diminished as digital solutions have become more advanced and abundant.

  

Background and biographical information is from Wikipedia articles on:

Photographic Filters that can be found at…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photographic_filter

Also see…

PhotographicCorner.com: Photographic Filters
http://www.photographycorner.com/articles/equipment/photography-filters

BetterPhotos.com on Photographic Filters
http://www.betterphoto.com/exploring/allQuotes.asp

by Gerald Boerner

  

“The blow was heavier than he had hoped it would necessarily be. … But the risks paid off; even the loss was worth the price.”
— Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Reaction to the severity of the attack

“… just prior to World War II, [the US] had some 700 people engaged in the effort and [was], in fact, obviously having some successes.”
— on the problem of retaining cryptographers

“If by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better," of the eight ‘plans’ (of the actions to be taken)…
— Memos from the Defense Department

“…[t]hese theories tend to founder on the logic of the situation. Had Roosevelt and other members of his administration known of the attack in advance, they would have been foolish to sacrifice one of the major instruments needed to win the war just to get the United States into it.”
— Mark Parillo, in his essay The United States in the Pacific

“Ten days before the attack on Pearl Harbor entered in his diary the famous and much-argued statement – that he had met with President Roosevelt to discuss the evidence of impending hostilities with Japan, and the question was ‘how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into the position of firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves.’ ”
— Henry L. Stimson, United States Secretary of War

“…if Japan be defeated and Germany remain undefeated, decision will still not have been reached…. War between the United States and Japan should be avoided…”
— Stark, CNO, and Marshall, Army Chief of Staff

“Any strength that we might send to the Far East would…reduce the force of our blows against Germany…”
— Stark’s Plan Dog

“… Japan was provoked into attacking the Americans at Pearl Harbor. It is a travesty of history ever to say that America was forced into the war. Everyone knows where American sympathies were. It is incorrect to say that America was truly neutral even before America came into the war on an all-out basis.”
— Oliver Lyttelton, the British Minister of War Production

  

Pearl Harbor: Conspiracy Theories about the Japanese Attack

USS Arizona_PearlHarbor_2 The attack on Pearl Harbor (or Hawaii Operation, Operation Z, as it was called by the Japanese Imperial General Headquarters) was an unannounced military strike conducted by the Japanese navy against the United States’ naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, on the morning of Sunday, December 7, 1941 (Hawaiian time, December 8 by Japan Standard Time), later resulting in the United States becoming militarily involved in World War II. It was intended as a preventive action to keep the U.S. Pacific Fleet from influencing the war the Empire of Japan was planning to wage in Southeast Asia against Britain, the Netherlands, and the United States. The attack consisted of two aerial attack waves totaling 353 aircraft, launched from six Japanese aircraft carriers.

The Debate

The Pearl Harbor advance-knowledge debate is a dispute over what, if any, advance knowledge American officials had of Japan’s December 7, 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor.

Ever since the Japanese attack there has been debate as to how and why the United States had been caught off guard and how much and when American officials knew of Japanese plans for an attack.

Japanese_attack_on_Pearl_Harbor,_Hawaii

American warships burning
out of control following
the attack

Several writers, including journalist Robert Stinnett and former United States Navy Rear Admiral Robert A. Theobald, have argued that various parties high in the U.S. and British governments knew of the attack in advance and may even have let it happen or encouraged it in order to force America into war via the "back door." Evidence supporting this view is taken from quotations and source documents from the time and the release of newer materials.

Examination of information released since the War has revealed there was intelligence information available to U.S. and other nations’ officials. Rather than attribute the lack of preparedness at the base to failure-to-process, some have argued that the U.S. must have had some degree of advanced knowledge of the attack.

Assertions that Japanese codes had already been broken

U.S. signals intelligence in 1941 was both impressively advanced and uneven. In the past, the U.S. MI-8 cryptographic operation in New York City had been shut down by Henry Stimson (Hoover’s newly appointed Secretary of State), citing "ethical considerations", which inspired its now broke former director, Herbert Yardley, to write a book, The American Black Chamber, about its successes in breaking other nations’ crypto traffic. Most countries responded promptly by changing (and generally improving) their ciphers and codes, forcing other nations to start over in reading their signals. The Japanese were no exception.

Nevertheless, U.S. cryptanalytic work continued after Stimson’s action in two separate efforts: the Army’s Signal Intelligence Service (SIS) and the Navy’s Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) crypto group, OP-20-G. Cryptanalytic work was kept secret to such an extent, however, commands such as the 14th Naval District at Pearl Harbor were prohibited from working on codebreaking by Admiral Kelly Turner as a consequence of the bureaucratic infighting in Washington.

By late 1941, those organizations had broken several Japanese ciphers, such as J19 and PA-K2, called Tsu and Oite respectively by the Japanese. The highest security diplomatic code, dubbed PURPLE by the U.S., had been broken, but American cryptanalysts had made little progress against the IJN’s current Naval Code D (called JN-25 by the U.S. after March 1942)

In addition, there was a perennial shortage of manpower, thanks to penury on one hand and the perception of intelligence as a low-value career path on the other. Translators were over-worked, cryptanalysts in short supply, staff generally stressed. Furthermore, there were difficulties retaining good intelligence officers and trained linguists; most did not remain on the job for the extended periods necessary to become truly professional. For career reasons, nearly all wanted to return to more standard assignments. However, concerning the manning levels, "… just prior to World War II, [the US] had some 700 people engaged in the effort and [was], in fact, obviously having some successes." Of these, 85% were tasked to decryption and 50% to translation efforts against IJN codes. The nature and degree of these successes has led to great confusion among non-specialists. Furthermore, OP-20-GY "analysts relied as much on summary reports as on the actual intercepted messages."

The U.S. was also given decrypted messages by Dutch (NEI) intelligence, who like the others in the British-Dutch-U.S. agreement to share the cryptographic load, shared information with allies. The U.S. refused to do likewise. This was, at least in part, due to fears of compromise; sharing even between Navy and Army was restricted.

In any case, the eventual flow of intercepted and decrypted information was tightly and capriciously controlled to the point at times even President Roosevelt did not receive information from code-breaking activities. (This was in part due to fears of compromise as a result of poor security, after a memo dealing with MAGIC was tossed in the wastebasket of Brigadier General Edwin M. (Pa) Watson, the President’s military aide. Also see the Harris article  for more detail and a broader perspective.)

PURPLE… The break into PURPLE was a considerable cryptographic triumph, and proved quite useful later in the War. It was the highest security Japanese Foreign Office system, but prior to Pearl Harbor carried little information about Japanese plans; the military, who were essentially determining foreign policy for Japan, distrusted the Foreign Office and left it "out of the loop". Unfortunately for the U.S., the two U.S. crypto groups generally competed rather than cooperated, and distribution of intelligence from the military to U.S. civilian policy-level officials was poorly done (eg, capriciously selected for distribution) by both the Army and Navy who handled the traffic on alternate days, and furthermore in a way preventing any of its recipients from developing a larger sense of the meaning of the decrypts. Along with the obsession with security, there was little or no analysis done for recipients. Decrypts were typically provided raw, completely without context, and without much taking into account the needs of the recipients. As well, recipients were not permitted to retain them, or notes made from them, again for security reasons.

Most unfortunately, to date not all PURPLE messages have been released. This was noted as long ago as the Joint Congressional Hearings during the "Magic" testimony. This known fact is often missed, as well as other curious items, for example, the Hearing’s questions regarding the missing 25 pages from the Roberts Commission report. Blanket or un-qualified statements on what decoded "Magic" messages revealed are, therefore, premature.

JN-25… The JN-25 superencrypted code is one of the most debated portions of Pearl Harbor lore. JN-25 is the U.S. Navy’s final term for the cryptosystem the Imperial Japanese Navy sometimes referred to as Naval Code D. Other names used for it include five-numeral, 5Num, five-digit, five-figure, AN (JN-25 Able), and AN-1 (JN-25 Baker), and so on. It was an example of the then state of the art in crypto systems and was quite different than modern forms of message encryption in being a code (e.g., battleship = 63982) and further being superenciphered with an additive cypher, taken from a large book. So, for example, 63982 + 12345 = 75227 (using modulo arithmetic, non-carrying addition and non-borrowing subtraction, also called Fibonacci or "Chinese" addition), giving the actually transmitted group (75227); on receipt the additive was subtracted (75227 – 12345 = 63982 (modulo arithmetic again)) and the code group looked up in the current JN-25 code book.

The worth of the additive step is that the next time anyone mentioned ‘battleship’, a different additive would be used. It was based upon the Japanese syllabary (kana), due to the difficulties in using kanji in telegraphy and the fact that electric teletype printers were more or less easily converted (e.g., more characters in the syllabary) to kana from the Roman alphabet.

Superenciphered codes of this sort were widely used and were the state of the art in practical cryptography of the time. JN-25 was very similar in principle to the British "Naval Cypher No. 3", known to have been broken by Germany during WWII.

Once it was realized what sort of cryptosystem JN-25 was, the cryptanalytic approach was known. Stinnett, in fact, notes the existence of a USN handbook for attacks on such a system, produced by OP-20-G. Even so, breaking it was not easy in actual practice. It took much effort and time, not least in accumulating sufficient depth in intercepted messages prior to the outbreak of hostilities when IJN radio traffic increased abruptly and substantially; prior to December 7, 1941 IJN radio traffic was limited, since the IJN played only a minor role in the war against China and therefore was only rarely required to send radio messages in their highest level crypto system. (As well, interception of IJN traffic off China would have been at best spotty.) Rather oddly however, the official history of GYP-1 shows nearly 45,000 IJN messages intercepted during the period from 1 June 1941 until 4 December 1941. Thus, most Japanese encrypted broadcast military radio traffic was Army traffic associated with the land operations in China.

Breaking a superencrypted cipher like JN-25 was a three-step process: (a) determining the "indicator" method to establish the starting point within the additive cipher, (b) stripping away the superencryption to expose the bare code, and then (c) breaking the code itself. When JN-25 was first detected and recognized, such intercepted messages as were interceptable were collected (at assorted intercept stations around the Pacific by the Navy) in an attempt to accumulate sufficient depth to attempt to strip away the superencryption. Success at doing so was termed by the cryptographers a ‘break’ into the system. Such a break did not produce a cleartext version of the intercepted message. Only after breaking the underlying code (another difficult process) would the message be available, and even then its meaning — in an intelligence sense — might be less than fully clear.

Detection of Japanese Transmissions

There are claims that as the Kido Butai (the Striking Force), steamed toward Hawaii, radio signals were detected that alerted U.S. intelligence to the imminent attack. For instance, the Matson liner SS Lurline, heading from San Francisco to Hawaii on its regular route, is said to have heard and plotted via "relative bearings" unusual radio traffic, in a telegraphic code very different from International Morse which persisted for several days, and came from signal source(s) moving in an easterly direction, not shore stations – presumably the approaching Japanese fleet.

There are numerous Morse Code standards including those for Japanese, Korean, Arabic, Hebrew, Russian, and Greek. To the experienced radio operator, each has a unique and identifiable pattern. For example, kana, International Morse, and "Continental" Morse all have a specific rhythmic sound to the "dit" and "dah" combinations. This is how Lurline”s radiomen, Leslie Grogan, a U.S. Navy reserve officer in naval communications, and with decades of maritime service in the Pacific identified the mooted signal source as Japanese and not, say, Russian.

There are several problems with this analysis. Surviving officers from the Japanese ships state there was no radio traffic to have been overheard by anyone: their radio operators had been left in Japan to send fake traffic, and all radio transmitters aboard the ships (even those in the airplanes) were physically disabled to prevent any inadvertent or unauthorized broadcast.

The Kido Butai was constantly receiving intelligence and diplomatic updates. Regardless of whether or not the Fleet broke radio silence and transmitted, there was a great deal of radio traffic picked up by its antennas. In that time period, it was not unknown for a radio antenna to reflect the energy of an incoming signal back to the ionosphere, where ionospheric skip could result in its reception hundreds or even thousands of miles away. Note that the Fleet, considered as a whole, contained a large array of such possible reflectors. Thus it is conceivable that the Kido Butai did not break radio silence but was detected anyway.

Such detection would not have helped the Americans track the Japanese fleet. A direction finder from that time period reported compass direction without reference to distance. To locate the source, a plotter needed two such detections taken from two separate stations to triangulate and find the target. If the target was moving, the detections must be close to one another in time. To plot the Fleet’s course with certainty, at least four such detections must have been made in proper time-pairs, and the information analyzed in light of further information received by other means. This complex set of requirements did not occur; if the Kido Butai was detected, it was not tracked.

Statements by High-Ranking Officials

One perspective is given by Vice Admiral Frank E. Beatty, who at the time of the Pearl Harbor attack was an aide to the Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox and was very close to President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s inner circle, with perspicuous remarks as:

"Prior to December 7, it was evident even to me… that we were pushing Japan into a corner. I believed that it was the desire of President Roosevelt, and Prime Minister Churchill that we get into the war, as they felt the Allies could not win without us and all our efforts to cause the Germans to declare war on us failed; the conditions we imposed upon Japan — to get out of China, for example — were so severe that we knew that nation could not accept them. We were forcing her so severely that we could have known that she would react toward the United States. All her preparations in a military way — and we knew their over-all import — pointed that way."

Another "eye witness viewpoint" akin to Beatty’s is provided by Roosevelt’s administrative assistant at the time of Pearl Harbor, Jonathan Daniels; it is the telling comment about FDR’s reaction to the attack – "The blow was heavier than he had hoped it would necessarily be. … But the risks paid off; even the loss was worth the price. …"

"Ten days before the attack on Pearl Harbor", Henry L. Stimson, United States Secretary of War at the time "entered in his diary the famous and much-argued statement – that he had met with President Roosevelt to discuss the evidence of impending hostilities with Japan, and the question was ‘how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into the position of firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves.’"

Robert Stinnett’s Day of Deceit suggests a memorandum prepared by Office of Naval Intelligence Lieutenant Commander Arthur McCollum was central to U.S. policy in the immediate pre-war period. The memo suggests only a direct attack on U.S. interests would sway the American public (or Congress) to favor direct involvement in the European war, specifically in support of the British. An attack by Japan would not, could not, do that, as history would prove. Although the memo was passed to Captains Walter Anderson and Dudley Knox, two of Roosevelt’s military advisors, on October 7, 1940, there is no evidence available to suggest Roosevelt ever saw it, nor any he did not.

Moreover, although Anderson and Knox offered eight specific plans to aggrieve the Japanese Empire and added, "If by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better," of the eight "plans" (actions to be taken) offered in the memo only one was ever implemented in any fashion, and there is considerable doubt the memo was the inspiration. Nonetheless, in Day of Deceit Stinnett claims all action items were implemented. Yet there were numerous instances of members of the Roosevelt Administration insisting on not provoking Japan. Mark Parillo, in his essay The United States in the Pacific, wrote, "[t]hese theories tend to founder on the logic of the situation. Had Roosevelt and other members of his administration known of the attack in advance, they would have been foolish to sacrifice one of the major instruments needed to win the war just to get the United States into it."

Furthermore, on 5 November 1941, in a joint memo, Stark, CNO, and Marshall, Army Chief of Staff, warned, "if Japan be defeated and Germany remain undefeated, decision will still not have been reached…. War between the United States and Japan should be avoided…." Additionally, in a 21 November 1941 memo, Brigadier Leonard T. Gerow, head of Army War Plans, stated, "one of our present major objectives [is] the avoidance of war with Japan…[and to] insure continuance of material assistance to the British." He concluded, "[I]t is of grave importance to our war effort in Europe…" Furthermore, Churchill himself, in a 15 May 1940 telegram, said he hoped a U.S. commitment to aid Britain would "quiet" Japan, following with a 4 October message requesting a USN courtesy visit to Singapore aimed at "preventing the spreading of the war" And Stark’s own Plan Dog expressly stated, "Any strength that we might send to the Far East would…reduce the force of our blows against Germany…" Roosevelt could scarcely have been ignorant of Stark’s views, and war with Japan was clearly contrary to Roosevelt’s express wish to aid Britain and with Churchill’s to "quiet" Japan.

One quote is often used to add legitimacy to the notion the British Government knew in advance the attack was coming. Oliver Lyttelton, the British Minister of War Production, said, "… Japan was provoked into attacking the Americans at Pearl Harbor. It is a travesty of history ever to say that America was forced into the war. Everyone knows where American sympathies were. It is incorrect to say that America was truly neutral even before America came into the war on an all-out basis." How this demonstrates anything with regard to Japan is unclear. Rather, it refers to other aid to Britain. Lend-Lease, enacted in March 1941, informally declared the end of American neutrality in favor of the Allies by agreeing to supply Allied nations with war materials. The signing of the bill into existence, because the materials would be used to combat the Axis powers, made the United States a de facto hostile and opened her to future attack. In addition, Roosevelt authorized a so-called Neutrality Patrol, which would protect the merchantmen of one hostile nation, Britain, from attack by another, Germany. Furthermore, Roosevelt ordered U.S. destroyers to report U-boats, then later authorized them to "shoot on sight". None of these is the act of a disinterested neutral, while all are unquestionably of assistance to Britain.

  

Background and biographical information is from Wikipedia articles on:

Advanced Knowledge Debate (Pearl Harbor) that can be found at…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor_advance-knowledge_debate

 

by Gerald Boerner

    

Laus Deo
Inscription on Washington Monument’s Capstone

“First in War, First in Peace, First in the Hearts of His Countrymen.”
— Inscription on the Washington Monument

“That an equestrian statue of George Washington be erected at the place where the residence of Congress shall be established.”
— Continental Congress

“Were it not for the parks and monuments and great federal buildings that break up the monotony, downtown Washington would be a visual and architectural disaster.”
— Jonathan Yardley, States of Mind: A Personal Journey through the Mid-Atlantic

“Taken altogether, Washington as a city is most unsatisfactory, and falls more grievously short of the thing attempted than any other of the great undertakings of which I have seen anything in the United States.”
— Anthony Trollope, English Novelist

“From atop this magnificent granite and marble structure, visitors may take in the beautiful panoramic view of the city with its division into four major segments. From that vantage point, one can also easily see the original plan of the designer…”
— Pierre Charles

“I have much faith in the American character, but I cannot believe either in Washington city or in the Washington Monument. The boast made has been too loud, and the fulfillment yet accomplished has been too small!”
— Anthony Trollope, English Novelist

“It’s not an imposed idea at all. Not like the Washington Monument, an Egyptian idea. Not like the Jefferson and Lincoln memorials, Greek or Roman or copies of other times. It’s a place that is of this time, of this era. I think of it as an American monument to a great American president.”
— Lawrence Halprin

The Washington Monument

Washington_Monument_Dusk_Jan_2006 The Washington Monument is an obelisk near the west end of the National Mall in Washington, D.C., built to commemorate the first U.S. president, General George Washington. The monument, made of marble, granite, and sandstone, is both the world’s tallest stone structure and the world’s tallest obelisk, standing 555 feet 5⅛ inches (169.294 m). There are other monumental columns (which are neither all stone nor true obelisks) which are taller. It is also the tallest structure in Washington D.C.. It was designed by Robert Mills, an architect of the 1840s.

The actual construction of the monument began in 1848 but was not completed until 1884, almost 30 years after the architect’s death. This hiatus in construction happened because of co-option by the Know Nothing party, a lack of funds, and the intervention of the American Civil War. A difference in shading of the marble, visible approximately 150 feet (46 m or 27%) up, shows where construction was halted for a number of years. The cornerstone was laid on July 4, 1848; the capstone was set on December 6, 1884, and the completed monument was dedicated on February 21, 1885. It officially opened October 9, 1888. Upon completion, it became the world’s tallest structure, a title previously held by the Cologne Cathedral. The monument held this designation until 1889, when the Eiffel Tower was completed in Paris, France. The monument stands due east of the Reflecting Pool and the Lincoln Memorial.

Motivation

Among the Founding Fathers of the United States, George Washington earned the title “Father of the Country” in recognition of his leadership in the cause of American independence. Appointed as commander of the Continental Army in 1775, he molded a fighting force that won independence from Great Britain. In 1787, as president of the Constitutional Convention, he helped guide the deliberations to form a government that has lasted for more than 200 years. Two years later he was unanimously elected the President of the United States.

Sketch of the proposed
Washington Monument by
architect Robert Mills
circa 1836

Washington defined the Presidency and helped develop the relationships among the three branches of government. He established precedents which successfully launched the new government on its course. He refused the trappings of power and veered from monarchical government and traditions and twice—despite considerable pressure to do otherwise—gave up the most powerful position in the Americas. Washington remained ever mindful of the ramifications of his decisions and actions. With this monument the citizens of the United States show their enduring gratitude and respect.

When the Revolutionary War ended, no one in the United States commanded more respect than Washington. Americans celebrated his ability to win the war despite limited supplies and inexperienced men, and they admired his decision to refuse a salary and accept only reimbursements for his expenses. Their regard increased further when it became known that he had rejected a proposal by some of his officers to make him king of the new country. It was not only what Washington did but the way he did it: Abigail Adams, wife of John Adams, described him as “polite with dignity, affable without familiarity, distant without haughtiness, grave without austerity, modest, wise, and good.”

Washington retired to his plantation at Mount Vernon after the war, but he soon had to decide whether to return to public life. As it became clear the Articles of Confederation had left the federal government too weak to levy taxes, regulate trade, or control its borders, men such as James Madison began calling for a convention that would strengthen its authority. Washington was reluctant to attend because he had business affairs to manage at Mount Vernon. If he did not go to Philadelphia, however, he worried about his reputation and about the future of the country. He finally decided that, since “to see this nation happy… is so much the wish of my soul,” he would serve as one of Virginia’s representatives. The other delegates during the summer of 1787 chose him to preside over their deliberations, which ultimately produced the U.S. Constitution.

George_Washington_Statue_Inside_Washington_Monument George Washington, bronze
replica of
Houdon‘s marble,
lobby, next to the elevators

A key part of the Constitution was the development of the office of president of the United States. No one seemed more qualified to fill that position than Washington, and in 1789 he began the first of his two terms. He used the nation’s respect for him to develop respect for this new office, but he simultaneously tried to quiet fears that the president would become as powerful as the king the new country had fought against. He tried to create the kind of solid government he thought the nation needed, supporting a national bank, collecting taxes to pay for expenses, and strengthening the Army and Navy.

Though many people wanted him to stay for a third term, in 1797 he again retired to Mount Vernon. Washington died suddenly two years later. His death restarted attempts to honor him. As early as 1783, the Continental Congress had resolved “That an equestrian statue of George Washington be erected at the place where the residence of Congress shall be established.” The proposal called for engraving on the statue which explained it had been erected “in honor of George Washington, the illustrious Commander-in-Chief of the Armies of the United States of America during the war which vindicated and secured their liberty, sovereignty, and independence.”

P.H. McLaughlin setting
the aluminum tip

Ten days after Washington’s death, a Congressional committee recommended a different type of monument. John Marshall, a Representative from Virginia (who later became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court) proposed that a tomb be erected within the Capitol. But a lack of funds, disagreement over what type of memorial would best honor the country’s first president, and the Washington family’s reluctance to move his body prevented progress on any project.

Dedication

The Monument was formally dedicated on February 22 (Washington’s birthday), 1885. Over 800 people attended to hear speeches by Ohio senator John Sherman, William Wilson Corcoran (of the Washington National Monument Society), Thomas Lincoln Casey of the Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. President Chester Arthur. After the speeches General William Tecumseh Sherman led a procession, which included the dignitaries and the crowd, to the east main entrance of the Capitol building, where President Arthur received passing troops. Then, in the House Chamber, the president, his Cabinet, diplomats and others listened to Representative John Davis Long read a speech given 37 years earlier at the laying of the cornerstone. A final speech was given by Virginia governor John W. Daniel.

Later history

At the time of its construction, it was the tallest building in the world; it remains the tallest stone structure in the world. It is still the tallest building in Washington, D.C.; the Heights of Buildings Act of 1910 restricts new building heights to no more than 20 feet (6.1 m) greater than the width of the adjacent street. (There is a popular misconception that the law specifically states that no building may be taller than the Washington Monument, but in fact the law makes no mention of it). This monument is vastly taller than the obelisks around the capitals of Europe and in Egypt, but ordinary antique obelisks were quarried as a monolithic block of stone, and were therefore seldom taller than around 100 feet (30 m).

Worlds_tallest_buildings,_1884 Diagram of the Principal High Buildings
of the Old World, 1884. The Washington Monument is the tallest structure represented.

The Washington Monument brought enormous crowds even before it officially opened. During the six months that followed its dedication, 10,041 people climbed the 897 steps and 50 landings to the top. After the elevator that had been used to raise building materials was altered so that it could carry passengers, the number of visitors grew rapidly. The original elevator was a steam elevator and took 20 minutes to go to the top. Wine and cheese were served to those riding, but only men were allowed on board since the elevator was considered unsafe. If women and children wanted to get to the top, they had to climb the 897 steps and 50 landings.

As early as 1888, an average of 55,000 people per month went to the top, and today the Washington Monument has more than 800,000 visitors each year. As with all historic areas administered by the National Park Service, the national memorial was listed on the National Register of Historic Places on October 15, 1966. The stairs are no longer accessible to the general public due to safety issues and vandalism of the interior commemorative plaques.

For ten hours in December 1982, the Washington Monument was “held hostage” by a nuclear arms protester, Norman Mayer, claiming to have explosives in a van he drove up to the monument’s base. Eight tourists trapped in the monument at the time the standoff began were set free, and the incident ended with U.S. Park Police opening fire on Mayer, killing him. The monument was undamaged in the incident, and it was discovered later that Mayer did not have explosives.

The monument underwent extensive renovation between 1998 and 2000. During this time it was completely covered in scaffolding.

Other Events on this Day
  • In 1790…
    Congress moves from New York City to Philadelphia.
  • In 1865…
    The Thirteenth Amendment is ratified, officially abolishing slavery.
  • In 1884…
    Workers finish construction of the Washington Monument
    .
  • In 1907…
    In Monogah, West Virginia, 362 men and boys die in a coal mine explosion, the worst mining disaster in U.S. history.
  • In 1957…
    The U.S.’s first attempt to place a satellite in orbit fails when a Vanguard rocket explodes on the launchpad at Cape Canaveral.
  • In 2006…
    NASA announces that the Mars Global Surveyor has discovered indications of recent water flows on Mars.

Dates and events based on:

William J. Bennett and John Cribb, (2008) The American Patriot’s Almanac Daily Readings on America. (Kindle Edition)

Background information is from Wikipedia articles on:

The Washinton Monument that can be found at…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Monument