Well, not me but my car. Having thought that I had emerged from Typhoon #16 without a scratch, Tuesday night found me listening to my car perform on 3/4 time rather than 4/4.
My car is a Toyota Trueno GT-Z which I purchased a year ago for a little less than $1500 CDN. The Z in its name denotes the presence of a suerpcharger that allows the 1.6L engine to produce over 170 horsepower with minimal lag and superb low end response.
Essentially, a supercharger is a turbine that is powered off an accessory belt from the engine. The turbine compresses the air to about 8psi, force feeding extra air into the engine. As oxygen is essential for combustion, the extra oxygen allows for a more powerful explosion and thus more power. To increase air density further, an intercooler acts to reduce the air temperature and thus feed more oxygen to the engine.
Intercoolers are usually located in 2 possible locations; in front of the engine behind the bumper or on top of the engine. Cars with intercoolers located in latter position can be easily identified with a hood scoop that allows cool air to contact the intercooler. Subaru Impreza WRX's are a common example. With the intercooler located on top of the engine, my car is fitted with a hood scoop. Usually, only air and a small amount of moisture is allowed to enter the engine compartment. However, with the rain falling horizontally rather than vertically during the typhoon, enough water entered into the engine compartment to cause the spark plug to become wet and refuse to fire. Thus, instead of listening to a smooth purr, a syncopated, rough sound emanted from my tailpipe last night.
Fortunately, the fix was a rather simple matter of removing the spark plug, drying it off, and reinserting it. Without any tools however, I had to take it to my mechanic who graciously charged only $25.
When I lived in Canada, my cars were quite new and almost no repairs. My Acura Integra's fuel pump expired making it difficult to start. My Prelude suffered nothing more than a failing battery after 7 years although in the care of my father, the power steering pump failed. With my current car, this is the third item in as many months. Certainly, when you pay so little for a car, a few problems are to be expected.
The first problem was a squealing sound from the left front wheel. The noise first became noticeable when I turned the steering wheel sharply. Gradually, the noise increased to include driving straight ahead. Under acceleration, the noise disappeared but became embarrassing when my foot lifted off the throttle. The problem? Bad wheel bearings. This was diagnosed by the mechanic shifting the wheel back and forth and noticing the 1 inch of slop. The bearings were replaced and the sound disappeared.
Three weeks later, I noticed water on the floor of the passenger footwell. At first I thought it was just water leaking after a severe rain and made a mental note to check for leaks around the windows next time I washed the car. I noticed the water had a bit of an oily texture to it but didn't think too much. Much to my chagrin, it was not merely rainwater but coolant that had exited the engine through the heating system.
Cars have a heater core which is used to heat the car's interior. The heater core is essentially a small radiator that dissipates heat into the heating ducts of the car. The coolant from the engine is pushed through the heater core, heating the surrounding air. It is then mixed with a certain amount of external air to achieve the desired temperature. My car's heater core developed a hole allowing the coolant to leak out, into the ducts and into the passenger footwell. As I drove along, the insufficient amount of coolant caused the engine to overheat, stranding me at an old ladies house. By adding water to the radiator, I was able to nurse the car to my mechanic. There, I was given an option. Replace the heater core for approximate $400 or bypass it for $10. Given that winter was still 6 months away at the time, I agreed to the bypass operation. At present, I am satisfied with my decision. However, I might be cursing my cheapness on those cold winter nights.
My mechanic is a particuarly talkative fellow who takes longer to talk to me than repair the car. As he speaks rapid fire Japanese with a healthy sprinkling of technical jargon and local dialect, my comprehension of his words of wisdom is sparse. However, a few nods of my head, a couple words here and there seem to inspire him to further monologuing. I must admit to being a bit of a car nut so I do my best to understand and learn. I should take up his invitation to visit on weekends for I am sure I will learn a lot more from first-hand experience than I would ever receive by trying to absorb words and diagrams from books.
Tuesday, August 31, 2004
Wednesday, August 25, 2004
Climbing Mt. Fuji
Also known as standing in the world's longest, highest, coldest line.
I returned from my week of adventure yesterday morning and I am still grappling with the lack of sleep. Sleeping on ferries, in capsule hotels, and various people's floors isn't the best way to fulfill one's sleep requirement but what is many hours of missed sleep when you receive such memorable experiences in return?
I ascended the mountain with nine Japanese friends, only two of whom I had met before. We drove from Yokohama to Yamanashi and arrived at the 5th stage just before 9pm. Yes, we were hiking at night. The idea is to reach the summit just before sunrise and watch the sun's rays emerge while sitting atop of Japan. As I had mentioned before, I had no delusions that the hike would be an amazing natural experience like hiking the West Coast Trail in Canada. I was aware of the crowds, the garbage and the smell of septic tanks would be an integral part of the expereince. However, the sheer number of people was overwhelming.
We began our climb at 9pm and there were quite a few people around. However, you could easily pass the slower the hikers and maintain a decent pace. Occassionally, there would be bottlenecks that would slow one down but, overall, you could march to your own drummer. As the night progressed, the crowds thickened to the point where passing slower hikers became impossible. Hikers completely filled the trail and each 4 or 5 steps taken were followed by a minute or two of waiting until I could progress 4 or 5 more steps closer to the summit. Needless to say, the time (about 3am) and the cold, howling wind, made the minutes of waiting seem much longer. The sky began to brighten in the east around 4:30am and the dreams of watching the sunrise from the summit were dashed. The sheer number of people made it impossible to climb any faster.
Sunrise occurred at about 5am and I managed to take a few pictures of the sun as it shone intermittently between the fast moving clouds that swirled around Mt. Fuji's peak. After another hour of slogging, I reached the top and huddled in a shelter in an attempt to protect myself from the wind and volcanic dust. After recovering for about an hour on the summit, we gathered our gear up for the descent down. Usually I enjoy the climb more than the descent but the lack of people, the soft volcanic sand that cushioned my joints, made it more enjoyable than I would have imagined. Plus, the idea of returning to the car provided a powerful incentive for a quick descent.
It was interesting to watch people climb the mountain. Many seemed to be on auto-pilot, moving at the same pace as those in front. As I waited for my friends to catch up, I would watch one person stop for no apparent reason. Although there was room to pass on the side, those following would also stop and rest. It seemed more of a forced death march rather than an enjoyable, memorable experience. It also surprised me to see so many women making the climb. I would estimate that 60% of the climbers were female and there were many groups of all female climbers. Living in a town where I am the only foreigner, I was also amazed to see all the foreigners. On reflection though, any famous attraction attracts tourists and Mt. Fuji is no different. The hikers are certainly not reflective of the makeup of the general population.
Would I recommend climbing Mt. Fuji? Yes, definitely but with the caveat that anyone expecting a "back-to-nature" experience should steer clear. Saturday night is probably the worst possible night to climb given the hordes of climbers. A weekday night would certainly be less crowded and undoubtedly more enjoyable. Climbing during the day is also an option but there is something undeniably unique in climbing a moutain at night and watching the sunrise from the summit.
Other insights/observations:
1. Toilets at the base cost 50 yen while those on top cost 200. Manage your bladder accordingly. Also, be prepared to stand in line to use the facilities.
2. Drinks cost 200 yen at the base (already 50 yen more than usual) and rise according to the elevation. Packing your own food and drink is certainly most economical.
3. Walking sticks can be purchased at the base and branded at each of the stations on the way up.
4. Starting at the 五合目(5th stage), you work your way to the 九合目 which is the summit. Each level was usually indicated by a collection of mountain huts. However, you quickly learn that each stage has a number of substages also indicated by a collection of huts. It was a little disheartening to trudge along for about an hour, reach the huts and realize that you are still on the same stage.
5. Dress for the winter. Although it was warm enough for just a t-shirt and shorts and the base, as you climb, the temperature drops and the wind picks up. Although I did not have a thermometer, I am sure the temperature was close to 0 and the windchill made it seem even colder. Ensure you have warm headwear, a good jacket with the ability to add or subtract layers underneath and a pair of gloves. In other words, dress for winter. Most people brought their skiwear although I soldiered on with my cold weather cycling gear.
I returned from my week of adventure yesterday morning and I am still grappling with the lack of sleep. Sleeping on ferries, in capsule hotels, and various people's floors isn't the best way to fulfill one's sleep requirement but what is many hours of missed sleep when you receive such memorable experiences in return?
I ascended the mountain with nine Japanese friends, only two of whom I had met before. We drove from Yokohama to Yamanashi and arrived at the 5th stage just before 9pm. Yes, we were hiking at night. The idea is to reach the summit just before sunrise and watch the sun's rays emerge while sitting atop of Japan. As I had mentioned before, I had no delusions that the hike would be an amazing natural experience like hiking the West Coast Trail in Canada. I was aware of the crowds, the garbage and the smell of septic tanks would be an integral part of the expereince. However, the sheer number of people was overwhelming.
We began our climb at 9pm and there were quite a few people around. However, you could easily pass the slower the hikers and maintain a decent pace. Occassionally, there would be bottlenecks that would slow one down but, overall, you could march to your own drummer. As the night progressed, the crowds thickened to the point where passing slower hikers became impossible. Hikers completely filled the trail and each 4 or 5 steps taken were followed by a minute or two of waiting until I could progress 4 or 5 more steps closer to the summit. Needless to say, the time (about 3am) and the cold, howling wind, made the minutes of waiting seem much longer. The sky began to brighten in the east around 4:30am and the dreams of watching the sunrise from the summit were dashed. The sheer number of people made it impossible to climb any faster.
Sunrise occurred at about 5am and I managed to take a few pictures of the sun as it shone intermittently between the fast moving clouds that swirled around Mt. Fuji's peak. After another hour of slogging, I reached the top and huddled in a shelter in an attempt to protect myself from the wind and volcanic dust. After recovering for about an hour on the summit, we gathered our gear up for the descent down. Usually I enjoy the climb more than the descent but the lack of people, the soft volcanic sand that cushioned my joints, made it more enjoyable than I would have imagined. Plus, the idea of returning to the car provided a powerful incentive for a quick descent.
It was interesting to watch people climb the mountain. Many seemed to be on auto-pilot, moving at the same pace as those in front. As I waited for my friends to catch up, I would watch one person stop for no apparent reason. Although there was room to pass on the side, those following would also stop and rest. It seemed more of a forced death march rather than an enjoyable, memorable experience. It also surprised me to see so many women making the climb. I would estimate that 60% of the climbers were female and there were many groups of all female climbers. Living in a town where I am the only foreigner, I was also amazed to see all the foreigners. On reflection though, any famous attraction attracts tourists and Mt. Fuji is no different. The hikers are certainly not reflective of the makeup of the general population.
Would I recommend climbing Mt. Fuji? Yes, definitely but with the caveat that anyone expecting a "back-to-nature" experience should steer clear. Saturday night is probably the worst possible night to climb given the hordes of climbers. A weekday night would certainly be less crowded and undoubtedly more enjoyable. Climbing during the day is also an option but there is something undeniably unique in climbing a moutain at night and watching the sunrise from the summit.
Other insights/observations:
1. Toilets at the base cost 50 yen while those on top cost 200. Manage your bladder accordingly. Also, be prepared to stand in line to use the facilities.
2. Drinks cost 200 yen at the base (already 50 yen more than usual) and rise according to the elevation. Packing your own food and drink is certainly most economical.
3. Walking sticks can be purchased at the base and branded at each of the stations on the way up.
4. Starting at the 五合目(5th stage), you work your way to the 九合目 which is the summit. Each level was usually indicated by a collection of mountain huts. However, you quickly learn that each stage has a number of substages also indicated by a collection of huts. It was a little disheartening to trudge along for about an hour, reach the huts and realize that you are still on the same stage.
5. Dress for the winter. Although it was warm enough for just a t-shirt and shorts and the base, as you climb, the temperature drops and the wind picks up. Although I did not have a thermometer, I am sure the temperature was close to 0 and the windchill made it seem even colder. Ensure you have warm headwear, a good jacket with the ability to add or subtract layers underneath and a pair of gloves. In other words, dress for winter. Most people brought their skiwear although I soldiered on with my cold weather cycling gear.
Thursday, August 12, 2004
Yasukuni Shrine
As three more Japanese cabinet ministers plan to visit the Yasukuni Shrine on August 15 to commemorate the end of World War II and the Prime Minister has confirmed he will visit the shrine again next year, the appropriateness of their visits is once again being debated. Mr. Koizumi has visited the shrine on four occasions since he became prime minister in 2001.
As demonstrated by the recent Asia Cup soccer tournament held in China, many Asian countries, especially South Korea and China, still hold a great amount of ill-will towards Japan and feel that having government ministers visit a shrine where convicted war criminals are enshrined is indicative of Japan's lack of remorse for its past imperialistic actions and a continued hostility towards its neighbours.
The shrine, located just outside the Imperial Palace in Tokyo was built in 1869 on the request of the Emperor Meiji following the restoration of the monarchy and the end of shogunate rule. The shrine originally housed the spirits of those who died in the Boshin Civil War. As the 20th century progressed and Japan became involved in a variety of conflicts, the number of spirits climbed to approximately 2,466,000. Although the shrine always espoused nationalistic and militaristic views, the addition of 1,068 war criminal spirits including General Tojo, the wartime prime minister, sparked further suspicion of Japan's inability to come to terms with its past. It is interesting to note that prior to the enshrinement of the war criminals, Japan's Asian neighbours did not criticize the visits of public officials. However, after 1978, the opposition has become more and more vocal with concerns that Japan is returning to its imperialist past and may once more threaten the sovereignty of its neighbours.
To provide a western perspective, imagine the outcry if Germany's prime minister visited a shrine where, among others, the spirits of Hitler, Goebbels and other members of the Third Reich were enshrined. Although the prime minister could claim he was commemorating the other spirits of the war dead, the mere appearance of worshipping such hated and vilified figures would create uproar among Germany's neighbours and other groups, especially the Jews.
Although the opposition to the visits has been most vocal externally, there has been heated discussion within the country as to whether or not the visits by public officials, especially the prime minister, violate the constitutional separation between state and religion. A number of cases have been brought before a variety of Japanese courts and the rulings have been inconsistent. The cases have centered on whether or not Junichiro Koizumi has visited in the shrine in the official capacity as prime minister. Earlier this year a Fukuoka court decided that the Prime Minister had visited the shrine in the official capacity of prime minister thereby violating the constitution. However, other courts have sided with the Prime Minister citing that his visits were of a personal nature.
Junichiro Koizumi is a Japanese citizen and is entitled to the same degree of personal freedom that other Japanese are entitled too. As a citizen, he has the right to visit a shrine of his own choosing. However, as Prime Minister, his actions in his private life cannot be completely separated from his position as prime minister. Many professions expect their members to maintain standards that are higher than those that are set for the general public. This is what generates respect and reverance for the position; the job of prime minister is one of supreme responsibility and his conduct, whether or not it is in an official capacity, reflects upon this position. Furthermore, during his visits, he signed his name as Prime Minister, used prime ministerial vehicles and staff to assist his visit. In other words, it had all the trappings of an official visit although he considered it to be private.
Mr. Koizumi has noted that his visits to other shrines have not provoked any controversy although they too could be considered a violation of the constitution by the same rationale. While this is true, the Yasukuni shrine is symbolic of Japan's militaristic past and as such generates strong feelings of anger and resentment. This has fuelled those who feel slighted by the visits to take the matter to court. Since his other visits to other shrines have not generated such emotion, there has been no desire to pursue the matter through the courts. Furthermore, I believe that the plaintiffs are less concerned about the requirement for the separation of religion and state. They want to put an end to the Prime Minister's visits to the Yasukuni Shrine. The most effective way they can do this is to use Article 20 as a tool to legally force the Prime Minister to cease his annual worshipping at the Yasukuni shrine.
All heads of state need to pay respect to those that have died in the name of the country. To not have this opportunity would denigrate the sacrifices that so many people have made. However, the secret ceremony in 1978 to enshrine the sprits of the war criminals has polluted the shrine's meaning and allowed this controversy to erupt and fester. Unless some action is taken to separate or remove the war criminals from the shrine, the Prime Minister's visits will forever be seen as a glorification of past militarism and a refusal to reconcile relations with neighbouring countries.
The Yasukuni website is located here. It provides some interesting reading that would make Orwell proud. "Nevertheless, to defend the independence of the nation as well as the peace of Asia, the sad development of wars with other countries arose." Perhaps the Shrine's hired scribe is the same person who helps the Bush administration justify their war on Iraq...
As demonstrated by the recent Asia Cup soccer tournament held in China, many Asian countries, especially South Korea and China, still hold a great amount of ill-will towards Japan and feel that having government ministers visit a shrine where convicted war criminals are enshrined is indicative of Japan's lack of remorse for its past imperialistic actions and a continued hostility towards its neighbours.
The shrine, located just outside the Imperial Palace in Tokyo was built in 1869 on the request of the Emperor Meiji following the restoration of the monarchy and the end of shogunate rule. The shrine originally housed the spirits of those who died in the Boshin Civil War. As the 20th century progressed and Japan became involved in a variety of conflicts, the number of spirits climbed to approximately 2,466,000. Although the shrine always espoused nationalistic and militaristic views, the addition of 1,068 war criminal spirits including General Tojo, the wartime prime minister, sparked further suspicion of Japan's inability to come to terms with its past. It is interesting to note that prior to the enshrinement of the war criminals, Japan's Asian neighbours did not criticize the visits of public officials. However, after 1978, the opposition has become more and more vocal with concerns that Japan is returning to its imperialist past and may once more threaten the sovereignty of its neighbours.
To provide a western perspective, imagine the outcry if Germany's prime minister visited a shrine where, among others, the spirits of Hitler, Goebbels and other members of the Third Reich were enshrined. Although the prime minister could claim he was commemorating the other spirits of the war dead, the mere appearance of worshipping such hated and vilified figures would create uproar among Germany's neighbours and other groups, especially the Jews.
Although the opposition to the visits has been most vocal externally, there has been heated discussion within the country as to whether or not the visits by public officials, especially the prime minister, violate the constitutional separation between state and religion. A number of cases have been brought before a variety of Japanese courts and the rulings have been inconsistent. The cases have centered on whether or not Junichiro Koizumi has visited in the shrine in the official capacity as prime minister. Earlier this year a Fukuoka court decided that the Prime Minister had visited the shrine in the official capacity of prime minister thereby violating the constitution. However, other courts have sided with the Prime Minister citing that his visits were of a personal nature.
Junichiro Koizumi is a Japanese citizen and is entitled to the same degree of personal freedom that other Japanese are entitled too. As a citizen, he has the right to visit a shrine of his own choosing. However, as Prime Minister, his actions in his private life cannot be completely separated from his position as prime minister. Many professions expect their members to maintain standards that are higher than those that are set for the general public. This is what generates respect and reverance for the position; the job of prime minister is one of supreme responsibility and his conduct, whether or not it is in an official capacity, reflects upon this position. Furthermore, during his visits, he signed his name as Prime Minister, used prime ministerial vehicles and staff to assist his visit. In other words, it had all the trappings of an official visit although he considered it to be private.
Mr. Koizumi has noted that his visits to other shrines have not provoked any controversy although they too could be considered a violation of the constitution by the same rationale. While this is true, the Yasukuni shrine is symbolic of Japan's militaristic past and as such generates strong feelings of anger and resentment. This has fuelled those who feel slighted by the visits to take the matter to court. Since his other visits to other shrines have not generated such emotion, there has been no desire to pursue the matter through the courts. Furthermore, I believe that the plaintiffs are less concerned about the requirement for the separation of religion and state. They want to put an end to the Prime Minister's visits to the Yasukuni Shrine. The most effective way they can do this is to use Article 20 as a tool to legally force the Prime Minister to cease his annual worshipping at the Yasukuni shrine.
All heads of state need to pay respect to those that have died in the name of the country. To not have this opportunity would denigrate the sacrifices that so many people have made. However, the secret ceremony in 1978 to enshrine the sprits of the war criminals has polluted the shrine's meaning and allowed this controversy to erupt and fester. Unless some action is taken to separate or remove the war criminals from the shrine, the Prime Minister's visits will forever be seen as a glorification of past militarism and a refusal to reconcile relations with neighbouring countries.
The Yasukuni website is located here. It provides some interesting reading that would make Orwell proud. "Nevertheless, to defend the independence of the nation as well as the peace of Asia, the sad development of wars with other countries arose." Perhaps the Shrine's hired scribe is the same person who helps the Bush administration justify their war on Iraq...
Tuesday, August 10, 2004
Presidential Candidate War Records
Again, ABC's Nightline has given me fodder for my log. Last night, they broadcast a program discussing the war records of John Kerry and, to a lesser extent, George W. Bush. The program concentrated on recent TV commercials that are criticizing John Kerry and accusing him of lying or exaggerating to achieve his war medals and denounced him as an unfit leader. Serious allegations.
The men accusing Kerry are themselves fellow veterans, not media hacks or people without some any first-hand knowledge of his actions in Vietnam. Furthermore, one would assume that criticizing a fellow veteran especially over something as serious as lying about his actions in combat to achieve medals, is not done lightly, no matter what the personal or political gains. However, one of the men now criticizing Kerry was an ardent supporter in the 1996 Senate race, publicly speaking out in favour of Kerry based on his leadership qualities and his demonstrated and acknowledged bravery in Vietnam. However, in 2004, something has made him change his mind.
When one watches a political commercial, one must ask who is behind it and what motiviations do they have. Obviously, if the issue had been so serious, these veterans should have sought to have his actions investigated before or soon after the medals were awarded, not 30 years later when the motivation seems so obviously political. In addition, the commercials are funded in large part by a diehard Texas Republican who has close connections with Karl Rove, Bush's Senior Advisor.
When the program interviewed the veterans, they seemed more critical of Kerry's actions after the war than his actual performance during it. Kerry's anti-war stance after returning seemed to be the focus of their anger and this anger is certainly understandable since Kerry's position undermined the sacrifices and risks that all veterans faced. On the Net, there is a website called Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry which outlines their crticism of the presidential candidate. It does provide some interesting reading although I thought a lot of the material seemed to portray Mr. Kerry as a man of compassion and critical thought rather than some radical idealist that should not be trusted. The excerpt below is from the above website. The part italicized is highlighted in the original text.
Kerry commanded his first swift boat, No. 44, from December 1968 through January 1969. He received no medals while serving on this craft.
While in command of Swift Boat 44, Kerry and crew operated without prudence in a Free Fire Zone, carelessly firing at targets of opportunity racking up a number of enemy kills and some civilians. His body count included-- a woman, her baby, a 12 year-old boy, an elderly man and several South Vietnamese soldiers."It is one of those terrible things, and I'll never forget, ever, the sight of that child," Kerry later said about the dead baby. "But there was nothing that anybody could have done about it. It was the only instance of that happening."Kerry said he was appalled that the Navy's ''free fire zone'' policy in Vietnam put civilians at such high risk.
Kerry experienced his first intense combat action on Dec. 2, 1968. He was slightly wounded on his arm, earning his first Purple Heart. In late January 1969, Kerry joined a five-man crew on swift boat No. 94 completing 18 missions over 48 days, almost all of them in the Mekong Delta
Unlike George W. Bush who never served in combat, John Kerry's experience with the trauma and reality of war has given him a unique perspective that certainly influences his decision-making process. This experience, as intangible as it is, can only help a president understand what it means to activate the military and send them half way around the world to engage in a conflict.
The program also discussed whether or not the Democrats have a right to criticize anti-Kerry ads that focus on his war record when the Democrats themselves have ads that focus on George W. Bush's war record or, more importantly, lack of it. To me, they are different issues. There is no dispute that John Kerry served in Vietnam, put himself at risk, and was awarded metals. Whether he deserved these metals or not can be disputed but it does not dismiss their existence. Furthermore, his anti-Vietnam stance was born out of experience rather than simple idealism that other anti-war protestors could be accused of. The ads attacking George W. Bush focus on an absence of any documentation about his activities in 1972. Also, the documentation that does exist indicates a concerted attempt to avoid duty in Vietnam and even a failure to fulfill his basic military obligations. These are very different issues. John Kerry could be viewed as a student who receives a university degree with an A average. However, some of his professors and fellow students criticize him for really being a B student and not deserivng all the accolades. George Bush, on the other hand, purports to have a degree but no one has heard of the university and none of the professors or fellow students are available to confirm his claim. Which is more worthy of criticsm?
Regardless, a war record is only one aspect of a candidate and it certainly shouldn't be used as the sole basis for making one's decision. At the same time, it should be understood that the criticism of Kerry's war record is a rather weak and underhanded political attempt to discredit a man who served his country and put his life at risk while distracting voters from the inconsistencies and issues the plague George W. Bush's record.
The men accusing Kerry are themselves fellow veterans, not media hacks or people without some any first-hand knowledge of his actions in Vietnam. Furthermore, one would assume that criticizing a fellow veteran especially over something as serious as lying about his actions in combat to achieve medals, is not done lightly, no matter what the personal or political gains. However, one of the men now criticizing Kerry was an ardent supporter in the 1996 Senate race, publicly speaking out in favour of Kerry based on his leadership qualities and his demonstrated and acknowledged bravery in Vietnam. However, in 2004, something has made him change his mind.
When one watches a political commercial, one must ask who is behind it and what motiviations do they have. Obviously, if the issue had been so serious, these veterans should have sought to have his actions investigated before or soon after the medals were awarded, not 30 years later when the motivation seems so obviously political. In addition, the commercials are funded in large part by a diehard Texas Republican who has close connections with Karl Rove, Bush's Senior Advisor.
When the program interviewed the veterans, they seemed more critical of Kerry's actions after the war than his actual performance during it. Kerry's anti-war stance after returning seemed to be the focus of their anger and this anger is certainly understandable since Kerry's position undermined the sacrifices and risks that all veterans faced. On the Net, there is a website called Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry which outlines their crticism of the presidential candidate. It does provide some interesting reading although I thought a lot of the material seemed to portray Mr. Kerry as a man of compassion and critical thought rather than some radical idealist that should not be trusted. The excerpt below is from the above website. The part italicized is highlighted in the original text.
Kerry commanded his first swift boat, No. 44, from December 1968 through January 1969. He received no medals while serving on this craft.
While in command of Swift Boat 44, Kerry and crew operated without prudence in a Free Fire Zone, carelessly firing at targets of opportunity racking up a number of enemy kills and some civilians. His body count included-- a woman, her baby, a 12 year-old boy, an elderly man and several South Vietnamese soldiers."It is one of those terrible things, and I'll never forget, ever, the sight of that child," Kerry later said about the dead baby. "But there was nothing that anybody could have done about it. It was the only instance of that happening."Kerry said he was appalled that the Navy's ''free fire zone'' policy in Vietnam put civilians at such high risk.
Kerry experienced his first intense combat action on Dec. 2, 1968. He was slightly wounded on his arm, earning his first Purple Heart. In late January 1969, Kerry joined a five-man crew on swift boat No. 94 completing 18 missions over 48 days, almost all of them in the Mekong Delta
Unlike George W. Bush who never served in combat, John Kerry's experience with the trauma and reality of war has given him a unique perspective that certainly influences his decision-making process. This experience, as intangible as it is, can only help a president understand what it means to activate the military and send them half way around the world to engage in a conflict.
The program also discussed whether or not the Democrats have a right to criticize anti-Kerry ads that focus on his war record when the Democrats themselves have ads that focus on George W. Bush's war record or, more importantly, lack of it. To me, they are different issues. There is no dispute that John Kerry served in Vietnam, put himself at risk, and was awarded metals. Whether he deserved these metals or not can be disputed but it does not dismiss their existence. Furthermore, his anti-Vietnam stance was born out of experience rather than simple idealism that other anti-war protestors could be accused of. The ads attacking George W. Bush focus on an absence of any documentation about his activities in 1972. Also, the documentation that does exist indicates a concerted attempt to avoid duty in Vietnam and even a failure to fulfill his basic military obligations. These are very different issues. John Kerry could be viewed as a student who receives a university degree with an A average. However, some of his professors and fellow students criticize him for really being a B student and not deserivng all the accolades. George Bush, on the other hand, purports to have a degree but no one has heard of the university and none of the professors or fellow students are available to confirm his claim. Which is more worthy of criticsm?
Regardless, a war record is only one aspect of a candidate and it certainly shouldn't be used as the sole basis for making one's decision. At the same time, it should be understood that the criticism of Kerry's war record is a rather weak and underhanded political attempt to discredit a man who served his country and put his life at risk while distracting voters from the inconsistencies and issues the plague George W. Bush's record.
Sunday, August 08, 2004
Not a Typhoon but a Hurricane
Living in a small, rural town, the selection of channels is rather limited. There are about 8 separate channels although it is common to have at least 2 or 3 of them broadcasting the same show. Thus, when you want to watch TV, your choices are rather limited.
In Vancouver, I had to flip through approximately 60 channels eventually settling on nothing. There was almost too many choices; what video is going to be next on the music channel? Any late breaking news on CNN, MSNBC, Newsworld? All these channels required constant monitoring reducing my ability to concentrate on one program. Additionally, the channel advance button on my remote was looking a little worn although my thumb muscles were beginning to show some definition.
Last night, the movie on TV was "The Hurricane". Directed by Norman Jewison and released in late 1999, it chronicled the story of a boxer, Rubin "Hurricane" Carter, who was imprisoned for murder in the mid-1960's. The film painted Carter as the helpless victim of a corrupt, racially biased justice system that conspired to convict and incarcerate the innocent Carter. Although I had listened and enjoyed the Bob Dylan song, "The Hurricane", I had not listened to the lyrics carefully nor had I understood the origin of the song.
As with any movie, I expected the writers and directors to use their artistic license to craft a story that would provide enough drama to appeal to a wide audience. In addition, condensing a story that extends over 30 years requires that certain facts are left unsaid and events are omitted to make the story more palatable. In other words, a movie should never be treated as a documentary (and documentaries themselves should always be viewed with a critical eye) but as a stepping stone for a more thorough investigation if the story should prove interesting.
The story did grip me; the movie strives to make the issue of his innocence clear. We see that he was obviously not involved. We know that the investigating officer holds a grudge against Carter for his childhood actions and which becomes more intense when the boxer achieves success in the ring. We hear his pleas, listen to his eloquent words protesting his innocence. We appreciate the positive effect his story has on a young black male who makes The Hurricane his idol. We empathize with the Canadians who volunteer their valuable time to research his case, uncover the hidden truth while facing threats to their life by the police attempting to keep the past buried. All of this adds up to a compelling story that cannot help but make the viewer side with The Hurricane and revile the corruption, racism and hatred that blight the justice system and society in general.
However, the truth is never so clear.
Searching on the web for more information on the case, I found a website written by a freelance Canadian writer who has spent much time researching and compiling information regarding The Hurricane. Her thesis is that the movie, and Bob Dylan's song for that matter, in an attempt to make the story more appealing to a general audience, ignores many details and the dark side of The Hurricane which undermines his credibility. Although I do not have the time to sift through all the arguments she presents, I do not doubt that the case is far more complicated than an 8 minute song or a 2 hour movie can portray and nor do I believe The Hurricane is in the same league as activists such as Malcolm X, Nelson Mandela or Gandhi. The website is worth a visit for a much closer examination of the issues that surround the case. Although I do appreciate her information, I do feel that her editorializing is unwarranted especially given the confrontational style she adopts in her writing. For example,
"Carter was not 11 when he and a group of his friends encountered a middle-aged white man, depicted as a maniacal pedophile in the movie, at the Great Falls. He was 14 when he was convicted for clubbing the man over the head with a bottle and robbing a watch and $55 dollars. It was Carter's fourth juvenile offence. Carter was an experienced and savage street fighter, the leader of a gang called the Apaches. Anyone would have thought twice before tangling with him, let alone trying to proposition him. Does this assault sound like a case of self-defence?" (italics added)
The sentence “Anyone would have thought twice before tangling with him” rests on the supposition that the pedophile was cognizant of his prior behaviour and could distinguish between a 14 year old street fighter and a “regular” boy of the same age. Another point of contention is that he was convicted when he was 14. However, there is no mention of when the incident occurred. It is conceivable that he was closer to the age of 11 and the legal proceedings occurred over a number of years.
Regardless of the truth, as elusive as it is in all complicated situations, the movie does raise awareness of injustices that do exist and how people can become victims of systemic racism and bias that are embedded in our institutions. Raising these issues is of great import and the movie provides a useful springboard for investigating this specific case and discussing racism in general. Any cursory examination of the incarceration statistics in the United States shows that something is seriously wrong with the current system. Despite the movie’s looseness with certain facts and its elevation of a perhaps unworthy Rubin Hurricane Carter to almost mythical status, it's abiltity to inspire people to question the inequalities and injustices that surround them and to work towards positive change is worthy of praise and makes The Hurricane a movie that should be watched.
In Vancouver, I had to flip through approximately 60 channels eventually settling on nothing. There was almost too many choices; what video is going to be next on the music channel? Any late breaking news on CNN, MSNBC, Newsworld? All these channels required constant monitoring reducing my ability to concentrate on one program. Additionally, the channel advance button on my remote was looking a little worn although my thumb muscles were beginning to show some definition.
Last night, the movie on TV was "The Hurricane". Directed by Norman Jewison and released in late 1999, it chronicled the story of a boxer, Rubin "Hurricane" Carter, who was imprisoned for murder in the mid-1960's. The film painted Carter as the helpless victim of a corrupt, racially biased justice system that conspired to convict and incarcerate the innocent Carter. Although I had listened and enjoyed the Bob Dylan song, "The Hurricane", I had not listened to the lyrics carefully nor had I understood the origin of the song.
As with any movie, I expected the writers and directors to use their artistic license to craft a story that would provide enough drama to appeal to a wide audience. In addition, condensing a story that extends over 30 years requires that certain facts are left unsaid and events are omitted to make the story more palatable. In other words, a movie should never be treated as a documentary (and documentaries themselves should always be viewed with a critical eye) but as a stepping stone for a more thorough investigation if the story should prove interesting.
The story did grip me; the movie strives to make the issue of his innocence clear. We see that he was obviously not involved. We know that the investigating officer holds a grudge against Carter for his childhood actions and which becomes more intense when the boxer achieves success in the ring. We hear his pleas, listen to his eloquent words protesting his innocence. We appreciate the positive effect his story has on a young black male who makes The Hurricane his idol. We empathize with the Canadians who volunteer their valuable time to research his case, uncover the hidden truth while facing threats to their life by the police attempting to keep the past buried. All of this adds up to a compelling story that cannot help but make the viewer side with The Hurricane and revile the corruption, racism and hatred that blight the justice system and society in general.
However, the truth is never so clear.
Searching on the web for more information on the case, I found a website written by a freelance Canadian writer who has spent much time researching and compiling information regarding The Hurricane. Her thesis is that the movie, and Bob Dylan's song for that matter, in an attempt to make the story more appealing to a general audience, ignores many details and the dark side of The Hurricane which undermines his credibility. Although I do not have the time to sift through all the arguments she presents, I do not doubt that the case is far more complicated than an 8 minute song or a 2 hour movie can portray and nor do I believe The Hurricane is in the same league as activists such as Malcolm X, Nelson Mandela or Gandhi. The website is worth a visit for a much closer examination of the issues that surround the case. Although I do appreciate her information, I do feel that her editorializing is unwarranted especially given the confrontational style she adopts in her writing. For example,
"Carter was not 11 when he and a group of his friends encountered a middle-aged white man, depicted as a maniacal pedophile in the movie, at the Great Falls. He was 14 when he was convicted for clubbing the man over the head with a bottle and robbing a watch and $55 dollars. It was Carter's fourth juvenile offence. Carter was an experienced and savage street fighter, the leader of a gang called the Apaches. Anyone would have thought twice before tangling with him, let alone trying to proposition him. Does this assault sound like a case of self-defence?" (italics added)
The sentence “Anyone would have thought twice before tangling with him” rests on the supposition that the pedophile was cognizant of his prior behaviour and could distinguish between a 14 year old street fighter and a “regular” boy of the same age. Another point of contention is that he was convicted when he was 14. However, there is no mention of when the incident occurred. It is conceivable that he was closer to the age of 11 and the legal proceedings occurred over a number of years.
Regardless of the truth, as elusive as it is in all complicated situations, the movie does raise awareness of injustices that do exist and how people can become victims of systemic racism and bias that are embedded in our institutions. Raising these issues is of great import and the movie provides a useful springboard for investigating this specific case and discussing racism in general. Any cursory examination of the incarceration statistics in the United States shows that something is seriously wrong with the current system. Despite the movie’s looseness with certain facts and its elevation of a perhaps unworthy Rubin Hurricane Carter to almost mythical status, it's abiltity to inspire people to question the inequalities and injustices that surround them and to work towards positive change is worthy of praise and makes The Hurricane a movie that should be watched.
Thursday, August 05, 2004
Artists and Politics
Every weekday evening, ABC's Nightline is rebroadcast in Japan on BS1, a satellite station that focuses on news and sports. Last night, Ted Koeppel was discussing the involvement of artists in the current US election campaign. Essentially, the argument against their involvement centres on an artist being unable to grasp and intelligently discusses the matters of great import that face the United States and the world.
As many artists pointed out, the idea that artists should be politically silent is a relatively new concept. Being relatively familiar with music of the 1960's, much of the work was politically charged with commentary denouncing the war in Vietnam, discrimination or other injustices. More recently, Robbie Robertson released a song that was based on an interview with Leonard Peltier, a Native American who many believe was wrongly imprisoned.
We don't question an artist when they discuss love or other life issues but when "serious issues" are raised, their credibility is questioned. Why is this?
The main reason for attacking the appropriateness of a politically active artist stems from fear; fear from those in power that the artist will actually succeed in mobilizing and influencing the usually apathetic masses. From what I perceive, the US media market is split into two main streams; the news/talk format and entertainment format. The news/talk format is predominantly right wing and continually espouses views that are supportive of the current administration. I would assume that people who listen to this format are politically active and they vote in line with the views expressed by the hosts of the shows. The entertainment stream generally avoids discussion of politics unless it has some entertainment value; a sex scandal is always good fodder. Since politics are largely ignored, they become unimportant and the listener would be less likely to engage in the political process.
Thus, a popular artist who discusses politics and activates this previously uninvolved group, especially if they do not toe the right wing line, presents a substantial threat to the current administration and their supporters. This fear leads to attempts to discredit the artists and prevent the political activation of a substantial number of potential voters.
A common argument against politically active artists is that they are unequipped to deal with substantial issues that are facing the world. They will be denounced as not in touch with the harsh realities that face the world and are misguided, perhaps idealist, in their simplistic view of the world. In certain cases, this may be true. There have been many occassions where an artist will make a daft comment or have a shallow grasp of an issue. However, this should not brand all artists as ill-informed soap boxers. President Bush has one many occassions shown substantial lapses in comprehension of important issues and an inability to appreciate the incongruity of his statements "See, free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don't attack each other. Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction." George W. Bush, Milwaukee, Wis., Oct. 3, 2003. And he is paid to be informed and articulate in these matters.
I would argue that well-informed artists are, in many ways, more able to discuss issues in a disinterested and unbiased manner. A business leader will support a government that implements policies that allow for more profits and an expansion of the business. His or her views are ultimately self-serving although they will wrap it in the rhetoric of creating jobs for the unemployed. Members of a religious group will fight to ensure that their ideals are forced upon the general public. They seek direct personal benefits for their political activity.
Artists, rather than benefitting from expressing their views, can risk alienating part of their audience and face admonishment from the record company that holds their contract. The Dixie Chicks were severely criticised by many right-wing groups for their disparaging remarks against President Bush. Well organized groups pressured radio stations to limit their airplay and stifled their right to freely express their opinions. When Bruce Springsteen was asked by Ted Koeppel if he was being politically active for his one personal benefit, Bruce replied that he was unhappy with the direction the country is heading and he doesn't want his children to live in the country that the current administration is creating. To me, being motivated politically to create a country that benefits future generations is refreshing rather than a cry for tax cuts or the imposition of religious fundamentalism.
There is much more that I wish to write on this topic as I feel that I have just begun. I will come back to it in the future. However, I wish to close for the moment with this thought:
How can a country that prides itself on freedom of expression be so paranoid about dissenting opinions that conflict with the current administration's policies. Is that not what makes a healthy democracy? Isn't the free exchange of ideas and opinions the best way to create a country that is inclusive and free from domination by a select group of people? Shouldn't everyone be able to express their opinion regardless of their occupation? Why should business people be considered superior to artists when politics are involved?
It is unfortunate that the coroporate culture, one that shuns the common person, is becoming accepted as the norm. People shouldn't be involved in the government; let the business leaders, the lawyers, and the rich deal make the sacrifice as they grapple with such difficult matters while you consume our products and help perpetuate the huge inequality gap that separates the rich from the rest. Political involvement by all members of society is probably the most important aspect of a democracy. Without this involvement, the government will be over-run by special interests and cease to be government for the people by the people but government for the rich by the rich.
As many artists pointed out, the idea that artists should be politically silent is a relatively new concept. Being relatively familiar with music of the 1960's, much of the work was politically charged with commentary denouncing the war in Vietnam, discrimination or other injustices. More recently, Robbie Robertson released a song that was based on an interview with Leonard Peltier, a Native American who many believe was wrongly imprisoned.
We don't question an artist when they discuss love or other life issues but when "serious issues" are raised, their credibility is questioned. Why is this?
The main reason for attacking the appropriateness of a politically active artist stems from fear; fear from those in power that the artist will actually succeed in mobilizing and influencing the usually apathetic masses. From what I perceive, the US media market is split into two main streams; the news/talk format and entertainment format. The news/talk format is predominantly right wing and continually espouses views that are supportive of the current administration. I would assume that people who listen to this format are politically active and they vote in line with the views expressed by the hosts of the shows. The entertainment stream generally avoids discussion of politics unless it has some entertainment value; a sex scandal is always good fodder. Since politics are largely ignored, they become unimportant and the listener would be less likely to engage in the political process.
Thus, a popular artist who discusses politics and activates this previously uninvolved group, especially if they do not toe the right wing line, presents a substantial threat to the current administration and their supporters. This fear leads to attempts to discredit the artists and prevent the political activation of a substantial number of potential voters.
A common argument against politically active artists is that they are unequipped to deal with substantial issues that are facing the world. They will be denounced as not in touch with the harsh realities that face the world and are misguided, perhaps idealist, in their simplistic view of the world. In certain cases, this may be true. There have been many occassions where an artist will make a daft comment or have a shallow grasp of an issue. However, this should not brand all artists as ill-informed soap boxers. President Bush has one many occassions shown substantial lapses in comprehension of important issues and an inability to appreciate the incongruity of his statements "See, free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don't attack each other. Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction." George W. Bush, Milwaukee, Wis., Oct. 3, 2003. And he is paid to be informed and articulate in these matters.
I would argue that well-informed artists are, in many ways, more able to discuss issues in a disinterested and unbiased manner. A business leader will support a government that implements policies that allow for more profits and an expansion of the business. His or her views are ultimately self-serving although they will wrap it in the rhetoric of creating jobs for the unemployed. Members of a religious group will fight to ensure that their ideals are forced upon the general public. They seek direct personal benefits for their political activity.
Artists, rather than benefitting from expressing their views, can risk alienating part of their audience and face admonishment from the record company that holds their contract. The Dixie Chicks were severely criticised by many right-wing groups for their disparaging remarks against President Bush. Well organized groups pressured radio stations to limit their airplay and stifled their right to freely express their opinions. When Bruce Springsteen was asked by Ted Koeppel if he was being politically active for his one personal benefit, Bruce replied that he was unhappy with the direction the country is heading and he doesn't want his children to live in the country that the current administration is creating. To me, being motivated politically to create a country that benefits future generations is refreshing rather than a cry for tax cuts or the imposition of religious fundamentalism.
There is much more that I wish to write on this topic as I feel that I have just begun. I will come back to it in the future. However, I wish to close for the moment with this thought:
How can a country that prides itself on freedom of expression be so paranoid about dissenting opinions that conflict with the current administration's policies. Is that not what makes a healthy democracy? Isn't the free exchange of ideas and opinions the best way to create a country that is inclusive and free from domination by a select group of people? Shouldn't everyone be able to express their opinion regardless of their occupation? Why should business people be considered superior to artists when politics are involved?
It is unfortunate that the coroporate culture, one that shuns the common person, is becoming accepted as the norm. People shouldn't be involved in the government; let the business leaders, the lawyers, and the rich deal make the sacrifice as they grapple with such difficult matters while you consume our products and help perpetuate the huge inequality gap that separates the rich from the rest. Political involvement by all members of society is probably the most important aspect of a democracy. Without this involvement, the government will be over-run by special interests and cease to be government for the people by the people but government for the rich by the rich.
Tuesday, August 03, 2004
Climbing Mount Fuji - A Tentative Plan
On August 21st and 22nd, I have been invited to climb Mt. Fuji with two friends from the Tokyo area. Although I use the word friends, they are really just acquaintances. I met them once at a party in May and they invited me to accompany them up the mountain. Knowing that climbing Fuji is one of those experiences that you should do while in Japan, I informed them that I was interested. After climbing the 3776m that is Mt. Fuji, I hope I will be able to call them friends.
From the stories I have heard, Mt. Fuji is not as pristine and tranquil as the pictures taken from afar would lead you to believe. Thousands of people trek up her flanks during the short climbing season and wherever thousands of humans go, you can be assured that a great deal of destruction and mess follows. I have heard stories of human waste fouling the mountainside and upsetting one's olfactory bulbs; countless stands and vending machines selling food, drinks and a myriad of trinkets to aid (or perhaps hinder) the climb. Plus, all the people climbing at the same time creates a human train that proceeds at the pace of its slowest member, no doubt an old man or lady, hobbled by arthritic joints. However, I can be thankful that they have yet to construct some sort of high speed lift that would whisk everyone up the mountain in climate controlled comfort.
Mt. Fuji has great significance to the Japanese. In fact, the characters that represent its name, have changed over the centuries reflecting the culture at that time. The current characters, 富士山, means the mountain of warriors. This name was adopted during the Kamakura shogunate when bushido, the code of the warrior, was developed. Prior to this, the name was less culturally charged, with characters representing it as a mountain that had no equal (不二山） or as a mountain perpetually covered by snow (不尽山）despite being snow free for at least a couple of months in the summer.
There seems to be many different trails to ascend Mount Fuji with varying levels of difficulty. In fact, one of the trails allows you to drive your car to an elevation of 2400m before being forced to climb the remaining 1376m. As I will be with friends, I probably will have little say in what trail I ultimately climb. Although I would prefer a challenging route, the experience of reaching the summit and watching the sunrise will be sufficiently rewarding regardless of the degree of hardship experienced during the climb.
From the stories I have heard, Mt. Fuji is not as pristine and tranquil as the pictures taken from afar would lead you to believe. Thousands of people trek up her flanks during the short climbing season and wherever thousands of humans go, you can be assured that a great deal of destruction and mess follows. I have heard stories of human waste fouling the mountainside and upsetting one's olfactory bulbs; countless stands and vending machines selling food, drinks and a myriad of trinkets to aid (or perhaps hinder) the climb. Plus, all the people climbing at the same time creates a human train that proceeds at the pace of its slowest member, no doubt an old man or lady, hobbled by arthritic joints. However, I can be thankful that they have yet to construct some sort of high speed lift that would whisk everyone up the mountain in climate controlled comfort.
Mt. Fuji has great significance to the Japanese. In fact, the characters that represent its name, have changed over the centuries reflecting the culture at that time. The current characters, 富士山, means the mountain of warriors. This name was adopted during the Kamakura shogunate when bushido, the code of the warrior, was developed. Prior to this, the name was less culturally charged, with characters representing it as a mountain that had no equal (不二山） or as a mountain perpetually covered by snow (不尽山）despite being snow free for at least a couple of months in the summer.
There seems to be many different trails to ascend Mount Fuji with varying levels of difficulty. In fact, one of the trails allows you to drive your car to an elevation of 2400m before being forced to climb the remaining 1376m. As I will be with friends, I probably will have little say in what trail I ultimately climb. Although I would prefer a challenging route, the experience of reaching the summit and watching the sunrise will be sufficiently rewarding regardless of the degree of hardship experienced during the climb.
Monday, August 02, 2004
Learning to Love a Typhoon
From reading my last post, you would assume that I would be ready to rant and rave against Typhoon #10 for destroying my weekend plans. However, things sometimes have a strange way of working out.
Knowing that the typhoon was to arrive on Saturday, my friend decided to take Friday off and make the journey to Oita on Thursday night. Although I had suggested this to her, I thought her busy work schedule would have made it impossible. However, a phone call from her Thursday evening informed me that she was on her way to the ferry and I should be in Usuki by midnight. Hurriedly, I tidied up the apartment and headed out. Now, Usuki is about 80km for where I live and traversing previously untravelled roads in the dark, especially in Japan, is never as easy as it sounds. However, I arrived with about 20 minutes to spare.
We arrived home at 2am, both of us quite exhausted, and quickly went to bed until I was awoken at 8am by a phone call from my mother informing me that our bird had made an amazing recovery from its mysterious ailment that had disrupted her balance for two days. We lazed about the apartment for a couple of hours before heading out. We drove to Takkirikeikoku, a valley with a river that is so shallow and flat that you can comfortably walk barefooted along the riverbed for about 2km until it ends in a waterfall. The coolness of the river was a welcome relief from the heat of the day and my car; my car's air conditioning is terminally weak and keeping the windows open is a far more effective method of cooling. However in 35 degree weather, open windows only provide a slight relief. After the valley, we headed off for a peaceful lunch at a restaurant in the mountains and then off for a drive to see some of the sights.
After enjoying a yuzu flavoured ice cream cone and visiting the "oosanshouoo", we went back to the apartment and watched the movie "Kill Bill". I had watched it once before but it was my friend's first time. She seemed to enjoy it despite the violence; she did flinch when certain body parts were lobed off and the blood began to flow.
Off we went for dinner at a curry restaurant, a full tank of gas and a viewing of the stone bridges that are illuminated at night.
As the typhoon approached on Saturday, we decided to stay relatively close to home in case the weather turned bad. Off for lunch, then to the Ajimu winery. With the approaching typhoon, almost everyone had decided to stay at home, making the winery extremely empty. For Japan, I suspose the winery is relatively impressive but it certainly does not compare to those in North American or Europe. We were able to enjoy a few tastes of the wine and wandered around the facilities. Later, we headed to a waterfall that I had never been too. Again, the threatening weather ensured that no one else was there, allowing us to enjoy its beauty in solitude. Since the weather has been dry recently, recent rain would have made the falls more spectacular but they were certainly enough to impress my friend.
Feeling the rain approaching, we decided to head to the local supermarket to pick up some food for the evening inside. We decided to make yakisoba and bought the required ingredients. However, as the night progressed, we were too full and/or unmotivated to actually make it. Thus, the ingredients still sit in my fridge as I write. We watched another movie.
On Sunday, the typhoon had passed and we headed off to Beppu for the 2 o'clock ferry. In all, the weekend was very enjoyable.
Knowing that the typhoon was to arrive on Saturday, my friend decided to take Friday off and make the journey to Oita on Thursday night. Although I had suggested this to her, I thought her busy work schedule would have made it impossible. However, a phone call from her Thursday evening informed me that she was on her way to the ferry and I should be in Usuki by midnight. Hurriedly, I tidied up the apartment and headed out. Now, Usuki is about 80km for where I live and traversing previously untravelled roads in the dark, especially in Japan, is never as easy as it sounds. However, I arrived with about 20 minutes to spare.
We arrived home at 2am, both of us quite exhausted, and quickly went to bed until I was awoken at 8am by a phone call from my mother informing me that our bird had made an amazing recovery from its mysterious ailment that had disrupted her balance for two days. We lazed about the apartment for a couple of hours before heading out. We drove to Takkirikeikoku, a valley with a river that is so shallow and flat that you can comfortably walk barefooted along the riverbed for about 2km until it ends in a waterfall. The coolness of the river was a welcome relief from the heat of the day and my car; my car's air conditioning is terminally weak and keeping the windows open is a far more effective method of cooling. However in 35 degree weather, open windows only provide a slight relief. After the valley, we headed off for a peaceful lunch at a restaurant in the mountains and then off for a drive to see some of the sights.
After enjoying a yuzu flavoured ice cream cone and visiting the "oosanshouoo", we went back to the apartment and watched the movie "Kill Bill". I had watched it once before but it was my friend's first time. She seemed to enjoy it despite the violence; she did flinch when certain body parts were lobed off and the blood began to flow.
Off we went for dinner at a curry restaurant, a full tank of gas and a viewing of the stone bridges that are illuminated at night.
As the typhoon approached on Saturday, we decided to stay relatively close to home in case the weather turned bad. Off for lunch, then to the Ajimu winery. With the approaching typhoon, almost everyone had decided to stay at home, making the winery extremely empty. For Japan, I suspose the winery is relatively impressive but it certainly does not compare to those in North American or Europe. We were able to enjoy a few tastes of the wine and wandered around the facilities. Later, we headed to a waterfall that I had never been too. Again, the threatening weather ensured that no one else was there, allowing us to enjoy its beauty in solitude. Since the weather has been dry recently, recent rain would have made the falls more spectacular but they were certainly enough to impress my friend.
Feeling the rain approaching, we decided to head to the local supermarket to pick up some food for the evening inside. We decided to make yakisoba and bought the required ingredients. However, as the night progressed, we were too full and/or unmotivated to actually make it. Thus, the ingredients still sit in my fridge as I write. We watched another movie.
On Sunday, the typhoon had passed and we headed off to Beppu for the 2 o'clock ferry. In all, the weekend was very enjoyable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)