“Just a hole in the ground…”: Context Matters

I don’t know much about TripAdvisor member “MarkAlles”. His profile is new on this site. He has visited 9 cities and from those visits he has written 13 reviews, 6 of them attraction reviews.

The reason he is on my radar is that, quite by accident, I stumbled onto a family member who is quite active on TripAdvisor and was please to see that he had visited Zivy Crater. While reading his review I noticed “MarkAlles” review and it gave me pause. His review states:

“A bit of a disappointment. Just a hole in the ground.

It took us awhile to find this spot. A bit of a disappointment. Just a hole in the ground. I would suggest that if you want a leisurely drive in the beautiful countryside and don’t expect too much, check it out.”

At first, I was upset. The Zivy Crater was an important part of the experiences for the men of the 18^th Battalion and the units of the C.E.F. The fighting was so bad in that area the military authorities decided to use the crater as a mass grave in which are interned the identified bodies of forty-eight identified soldiers and five unidentified soldiers. Of the dead, all but two are Canadian, and of that number thirteen served with the 18^th Battalion when they died. By extension, the use of a mass-grave indicates that the condition of the bodies of those to be interred was in such a poor state that it was eminently respectful and appropriate to bury these men together, as opposed to separate graves marked with a headstone.

They rest. Together. As the Brothers in Arms they are.

Then I realized I should not be upset. I do not know the context in which “MarkAlles” wrote his review but it does illustrate that those that do not know history are doomed to repeat it. To him, the crater is “just a hole in the ground” when, in actuality, it is sacred ground in which are interned brave and unselfish men who sacrificed their lives so “MarkAlles” could be disappointed for having his day interrupted by trying to find the “spot”. He then admonishes prospective travellers to “not to expect to much” and if they want a “leisurely drive in the beautiful countryside” they can “check it [Zivy Crater] out”.

It is interesting to note that one could not, but know, that crater was a burial ground. The names are inscribed in panels around the memorial and the stone cross would signify the importance and solemnity of the place. That is was not just a place to “hit up and check out” but a place to stop and reflect on the sacrifices of others.

Maybe “MarkAlles” is having us on? Perhaps he was suffering from traveller’s fatigue having positively reviewed the memorials at Beaumont-Hamel and Vimy. Or was it his distance from history? That somehow, if the memorial was not grand and impressive like that of Vimy or tragic and dramatic like that of Beaumont-Hamel, a simple crater, fashioned out of necessity into a mass-grave for the fallen, does not impress?

I suspect that if “MarkAlles” could take a moment and understand the context of Zivy Crater, and the other 2,918 C.W.G.C. graves in France I know his comments would be more respectful and appropriate.

It does make one pause to see the casual attitude taken in this review while “MarkAlles’” other reviews indicate an empathy and understanding to those men who sacrificed so very much at those other battlefields. It serves as a reminder that we, the people that hold the heritage of the people of our past, must take time and make the effort to understand and pass on the importance and context of such sacrifice.

I thank “MarkAlles” for writing his review of Zivy Crater. It gives someone a chance to counter his review with a more constructive and illuminating context that, if he reads this post, will lead to a better understanding and appreciation for Zivy Crater and the men buried, together, there.