The state of Washington doesn’t really seem to care about its history. True, since it’s the west coast, there’s not much history to learn about. But what history is here is largely unexplained and uninterpreted.

When I travel, I generally focus upon history. It can be fairly recent or even prehistoric (which is a silly word), but my travels often involve or completely revolve around the historic. I’ve traveled around much of western Washington, diving into the history of Seattle and the passes over the Cascades. I’ve studied the natives, the white folk, the British, Spanish and, later, Americans who claimed this area as their own.

Overall, there is almost zero interpretation of any of this. Take my recent “discovery” of Fort Casey on Whidbey Island.

Back east, a fort this size and in this good of condition would have some explanation. There would be plaques, markers, tour guides and probably a gift shop (I guess it’s the price we pay). There wasn’t a single historical marker or sign explaining what any of this was.

As you walk from the parking lot to the fort itself there is a little bulletin board kind of sign with a very rudimentary map (xeroxed?) and maybe a few words about the fort (when it was built, etc). However, that’s it.

Learning the history of a place while you’re visiting the place is great! The old and ancient are given new life when you’re standing where those before us have stood. The artillery pieces at the fort were pretty spectacular. How far they could shoot, how they were loaded and how quickly they became obsolete would have meant much more if I hadn’t simply read it on a Wikipedia page.

All this begs the question: why? Why isn’t this site, and many others in this fine state, interpreted? Is it a financial thing? Is this a trade off for not having a state income tax? Maybe it is. Mostly, however, I think it’s a lack of interest stemming from the fact that most everybody here is new.

Many of the outlying communities, which have had the chance to foster a few generations of fairly stationary residents, have pretty nice historical societies. And while they’ve generally not gotten around to the interpretation of historic sites, at least there is a growing interest.

But Seattle and the more touristy parts around it (such as Fort Casey, I guess) suffer greatly from lack of roots. We are a very transient city made up of many self-focused people on their way to get more coffee. So few of us stop to think of what was here before us. Too many Seattleites fail to perceive that there even is an us – usually it’s just a “me.”

Since Fort Caseyis far enough away from the city to not be as influenced by this poisonous attitude, there’s probably a good chance that it’ll be interpreted at some point. But for Discovery Park and Magnuson Park (an army base with an old missile silo and a Navy base with ammunition bunkers, respectively) there’s probably no hope at all.

What little hope there is seems to be left to the individual. The “underground” of Seattle was nearly forgotten until one person took it upon himself to uncover it. Here, history must be tracked down, researched and then interpreted.

Back east, the basic story is told through historical markers and tour guides. From there, you can delve into the details. Here, it seems, even the basic story must be dug up – what to say of the details. We become the voices of the past and the tour guides to the very few who are interested enough to listen.