I use Cruise Control wherever I go, even for as short a distance as two blocks. Left to my own devices, there is no telling how fast I might go, so in the interests of public harmony, I restrain my speed and Cruise Control helps me do that. Driving any distance, even as short as two blocks, at 25 miles per hour is tedious in the extreme. Twelve years of living in Hillsboro has inured me to this and it no longer bothers me as much as it did, but it is still very bad.
I like the Cruise Control on our 1995 Ford Windstar minivan because it lets you set the cruise speed to as low as 25 MPH. The lower cruise limit on our other three (!?!?) (all newer) vehicles is 35 MPH, which makes it useless for traveling through these endless suburban neighborhoods. I would like it better if it went even lower, like 20 MPH for school zones, and 10 MPH for parking lots. It can take a subjective hour to get from one side to the other of some of these mall lots at 10 MPH. I cannot do it. With a Cruise that controls my speed down to that level, I could.
The Cruise Control on my 1999 Dodge Dakota has a "Cancel" button, something the Ford does not have. It's function is mostly psychological. It has the same effect as tapping the brakes: it disengages the Cruise function, but does not turn it off, so it retains the speed setting. Pressing resume will return the vehicle to its' previous speed. You can tap on the brakes so lightly as to not have any noticeable braking effect, yet it will disengage the cruise control. However, your brake lights will undoubtedly come on, and you are using a control for other than it's intended purpose. Disengaging the Cruise Control can also cause the vehicle to slow down, but it is mostly a function of wind resistance. Brakes are to slow the vehicle very quickly. In any case I like and use the "Cancel" button.
Another feature of the Windstar's Cruise Control is that you can adjust the speed in one MPH increments. Tap the "ACCEL" button, and speed will increase by one MPH. Tap the "COAST" button, and speed will be reduced by one MPH. Five taps will change your speed by five MPH. I also use this feature. I would rather have a dial that would allow me to set the speed anywhere from five to five hundred MPH (Whoa dude! five hundred MPH! That would be so cool!), but dial controls seem to be out of favor these days. Maybe I will build one someday.
The Cruise controls on our three American vehicles are buttons on the steering wheel around the central horn button/air bag. Our newest vehicle, a Japanese Mitsubishi Endeavor, uses a short stalk, like a turn signal stalk, which gives it a total of three. One for lights, one for wipers, and one for cruise. I think they moved the Cruise control to a stalk because they put a bunch of radio control buttons on the wheel itself. No more room there for Cruise controls. Interestingly, the buttons for the radio are on the back side of the wheel, invisible to the driver, though they can be easily located by touch. But back tot he Cruise control. The first two stalks (for lights and wipers) are mounted to the steering column housing, that is, they do not rotate with the steering wheel. However, the Cruise control does. It is a little odd. And this little lever has more functions than Carter has pills. It moves up, down, back and it has a button on the end to be pressed.
Monday, June 11, 2007
Sunday, June 10, 2007
Run Johnny Run
John and his friend Keven ran the Helvetia half marathon Saturday. Last year John beat Keven, this year, Keven beat John. They both beat last years times in spite of not training for the last month.
Update December 2016 replaced missing picture.
Lost In Translation
When I was in Seattle a couple of weeks ago, I was startled by a serious gap in my children's education, and so, in a feeble effort to correct this deficiency, I purchased a copy of the "I Ching" (translated by James Legge). In his preface I came across a section that illuminated the whole Asian to Western Language translation problem:
"When I made my first translation of it in 1854, I endeavored to be as concise in my English as the original Chinese was. Much of what I wrote was made up, in consequence, of so many English words, with little or no mark of syntactical connexion. I followed in this the example of P. Regis and his coadjutors (Introduction, page 9) in their Latin version. But their version is all but unintelligible, and mine was not less so. How to surmount this difficulty occurred to me after I had found the clue to the interpretation;- in a fact which I had unconsciously acted on in all my translations of the other classics, namely, that the written characters of the Chinese are not representations of words, but symbols of ideas, and that the combination of them in composition is not a representation of what the writer would say, but of what he thinks. It is vain therefore for a translator to attempt a literal version. When the symbolic characters have brought his mind en rapport with that of this author, he is free to render the ideas in his own or any other speech in the best manner that he can attain to."
Last night my wife and I watched "The History Boys", or at least the first 95% of it. Something in this movie prompted me to realize that a large part of poetry is the sound it makes. Not everyone is enraptured by the same kind of music, and for some spoken poetry is very pleasant, perhaps even enthralling. My father liked poetry. It does not do much for me. I might enjoy it, but not enough to make note of it.
I do not listen to music much anymore. I really liked rock and roll when I was growing up, but I have heard all the songs so many times, I do not want to here any of them again. Hearing one once in a while is okay, but I pretty much go without music now. The classics do nothing for me, nor does hardly anything modern. I last thing I heard that I really enjoyed was the soundtrack to "Kill Bill".
And speaking of Uma Thurman (star of Kill Bill), she has followed Clive Owen into the "made for advertising" movie business with a film for Pirelli.
"When I made my first translation of it in 1854, I endeavored to be as concise in my English as the original Chinese was. Much of what I wrote was made up, in consequence, of so many English words, with little or no mark of syntactical connexion. I followed in this the example of P. Regis and his coadjutors (Introduction, page 9) in their Latin version. But their version is all but unintelligible, and mine was not less so. How to surmount this difficulty occurred to me after I had found the clue to the interpretation;- in a fact which I had unconsciously acted on in all my translations of the other classics, namely, that the written characters of the Chinese are not representations of words, but symbols of ideas, and that the combination of them in composition is not a representation of what the writer would say, but of what he thinks. It is vain therefore for a translator to attempt a literal version. When the symbolic characters have brought his mind en rapport with that of this author, he is free to render the ideas in his own or any other speech in the best manner that he can attain to."
Last night my wife and I watched "The History Boys", or at least the first 95% of it. Something in this movie prompted me to realize that a large part of poetry is the sound it makes. Not everyone is enraptured by the same kind of music, and for some spoken poetry is very pleasant, perhaps even enthralling. My father liked poetry. It does not do much for me. I might enjoy it, but not enough to make note of it.
I do not listen to music much anymore. I really liked rock and roll when I was growing up, but I have heard all the songs so many times, I do not want to here any of them again. Hearing one once in a while is okay, but I pretty much go without music now. The classics do nothing for me, nor does hardly anything modern. I last thing I heard that I really enjoyed was the soundtrack to "Kill Bill".
And speaking of Uma Thurman (star of Kill Bill), she has followed Clive Owen into the "made for advertising" movie business with a film for Pirelli.
Dog Sled on Wheels
Eskimos use dogsleds in the far North. They stand on the back end and ride when the going is easy, step off and push when the going gets hard. The sleds can carry a good deal of freight, hundreds of pounds even.
In my neighborhood we have baby joggers, three wheel strollers with larger wheels than are found on a typical stroller. People take their babies for rides in these things. They can walk or jog, or perhaps even run while pushing these carriages.
So I am thinking we could use something that combined the features of these two devices: dog sled and jogging stroller.
It should be big enough to carry a useful load, like a weeks worth of groceries along with a toddler. It should have a step on the back that driver can stand on when the going is easy. It would have three wheels because we do not have snow and ice here. Maybe where you are you would want runners. The front wheel would be steerable. It would need to be connected to a steering device at the back. You could have a hook on the front to connect your dog or dogs to, if you had any. It would need brakes for going down hills, and a parking brake of some sort so your groceries do not go rolling away with your toddler when you stop to talk to someone. It should be light weight. Pushing something uphill is hard enough without it being extra heavy.
Mothers could use it for grocery shopping. Fathers could use it for giving their children rides down the hill near their house. The third world could use it for hauling freight. Owners of larger dogs could use it for exercising their animals.
In my neighborhood we have baby joggers, three wheel strollers with larger wheels than are found on a typical stroller. People take their babies for rides in these things. They can walk or jog, or perhaps even run while pushing these carriages.
So I am thinking we could use something that combined the features of these two devices: dog sled and jogging stroller.
It should be big enough to carry a useful load, like a weeks worth of groceries along with a toddler. It should have a step on the back that driver can stand on when the going is easy. It would have three wheels because we do not have snow and ice here. Maybe where you are you would want runners. The front wheel would be steerable. It would need to be connected to a steering device at the back. You could have a hook on the front to connect your dog or dogs to, if you had any. It would need brakes for going down hills, and a parking brake of some sort so your groceries do not go rolling away with your toddler when you stop to talk to someone. It should be light weight. Pushing something uphill is hard enough without it being extra heavy.
Mothers could use it for grocery shopping. Fathers could use it for giving their children rides down the hill near their house. The third world could use it for hauling freight. Owners of larger dogs could use it for exercising their animals.
Saturday, June 9, 2007
Bad Movies
A couple of weeks ago we started watching "La Haine" (Hate) on Ross's recommendation. Young hooligans hanging out in the projects outside Paris, nothing to do but be obnoxious. May have been realistic, but was still very annoying. We gave up after 15 or 20 minutes.
Last night we watched "Young Adam". Young man having his way with a succession of women and leaving a trail of death and destruction behind him. Not all his fault, but he does not make any attempt to correct for his actions. He is a villain, not a hero.
Reminds me of "In the Company of Men", which I watched a few years ago, and really hated for the same reasons. Looking at some of the reviews for this movie, I am trying to remember if I found anything funny in it. It is billed as a comedy. I wonder who the hell would think this shit is funny? Maybe the same jackasses who would take the villain for a role-model. Well made movies, I just am not interested in stories about jackasses. I run into that enough in real life.
Last night we watched "Young Adam". Young man having his way with a succession of women and leaving a trail of death and destruction behind him. Not all his fault, but he does not make any attempt to correct for his actions. He is a villain, not a hero.
Reminds me of "In the Company of Men", which I watched a few years ago, and really hated for the same reasons. Looking at some of the reviews for this movie, I am trying to remember if I found anything funny in it. It is billed as a comedy. I wonder who the hell would think this shit is funny? Maybe the same jackasses who would take the villain for a role-model. Well made movies, I just am not interested in stories about jackasses. I run into that enough in real life.
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
Mother's Day
The band at church ('the music team') had new electric guitar player, and he had some cool sounds. Some kind of electronic distortion whozer-whatsit, I suppose. They played "Get Together" by the Youngbloods. Talk about Peabody's wayback machine! I recognized the song, and the name of the band, but I did not recognize the name of the song, and I was not able to connect the name of the band to the song. Evidently it was part of the soundtrack for "Easy Rider". Anyway it was pretty cool.
Had a long conversation with Ross about books and movies. He recommended a book titled "The Road" by Cormac McCarthy of "All The Pretty Horses" fame. I just finished it myself, and I have to agree, it is a pretty good book. Grim little story of a father's devotion to his son in a very hostile landscape.
I think Ross told me he was reading, or had recently read, "The Sound & The Fury" by Faulkner. He had also read a detective story for one of his classes called "Bloodshot" by Paretsky which he did not like at all.
Movies:
Ross brought home a copy of "Army of Shadows" so Anne and I got a chance to see it. Grim little story of the French Resistance in WWII. As Ross put it, there was no Hollywood to it. Stark realism. Very sad when you have to shoot your best friend in cold blood.
"Painted Veil" we rented at the video store. Based on a story by W. Somerset Maugham. This was a new writer to Ross. He had heard of Faulker, Steinbeck and Hemingway, but not Maugham. I have heard of this guy since forever, probably from my parents, though I could not name any of his books.
"King Maker" was not very good. It takes place in the mid 1500's, and places the Portugese in Thailand. I found it interesting because I had recently finished "Quicksilver", which is all about the goings on in Europe one hundred years later, and trade with the Orient is a key element.
I do not know anything about "Man Bites Dog" other than Ross recommends it.
As far as music goes, all I can do is mention the names of the bands we talked about:
Had a long conversation with Ross about books and movies. He recommended a book titled "The Road" by Cormac McCarthy of "All The Pretty Horses" fame. I just finished it myself, and I have to agree, it is a pretty good book. Grim little story of a father's devotion to his son in a very hostile landscape.
I think Ross told me he was reading, or had recently read, "The Sound & The Fury" by Faulkner. He had also read a detective story for one of his classes called "Bloodshot" by Paretsky which he did not like at all.
Movies:
- Man Bites Dog
- Das Boot (Director's cut. Four hours long!)
- Army of Shadows
- Painted Veil
- King Maker
Ross brought home a copy of "Army of Shadows" so Anne and I got a chance to see it. Grim little story of the French Resistance in WWII. As Ross put it, there was no Hollywood to it. Stark realism. Very sad when you have to shoot your best friend in cold blood.
"Painted Veil" we rented at the video store. Based on a story by W. Somerset Maugham. This was a new writer to Ross. He had heard of Faulker, Steinbeck and Hemingway, but not Maugham. I have heard of this guy since forever, probably from my parents, though I could not name any of his books.
"King Maker" was not very good. It takes place in the mid 1500's, and places the Portugese in Thailand. I found it interesting because I had recently finished "Quicksilver", which is all about the goings on in Europe one hundred years later, and trade with the Orient is a key element.
I do not know anything about "Man Bites Dog" other than Ross recommends it.
As far as music goes, all I can do is mention the names of the bands we talked about:
- Sergio Mendes (Bossa Nova)
- Sonic Youth
- Flint
News & Foreign Policy
Jonathan Nicholas writes a column for our local metropolitan paper "The Oregonian". Normally I do not read his column, but a couple of days ago I did. It is one of his more substantive columns. Here is the column, and here is my response:
Normally I do not read your column, but I did today. I think you hit the nail on the head. This might be one of the problems with democracy, or maybe it is just the nature of people.
It is hard to tell, but I think "The Oregonian" has moved farther away from hard news and international news, and more towards the "USA Today" model, that is, all fluff and nonsense.
I susbscribed to "The Wall Street Journal" for a couple of years and I really enjoyed it. I canceled my subscription this year because I found I was not reading it. Either there was not enough time, or I did not have the energy. It takes energy to read serious articles. I suppose that is one reason "fluff" is so popular, it does not take much energy to read it.
I saw a copy of "The Columbian" (a suburban paper printed across the river in Vancouver, Washington) the other day and I was suprised to see that it seemed to be full of hard news and international news. I would not expect that sort of thing from a suburban paper. The "Hillsboro Argus" (our local suburban paper), for instance, does not seem to be bothered by that.
As for our foreign policy? Money talks, and it manages to buy the silence of many.
Normally I do not read your column, but I did today. I think you hit the nail on the head. This might be one of the problems with democracy, or maybe it is just the nature of people.
It is hard to tell, but I think "The Oregonian" has moved farther away from hard news and international news, and more towards the "USA Today" model, that is, all fluff and nonsense.
I susbscribed to "The Wall Street Journal" for a couple of years and I really enjoyed it. I canceled my subscription this year because I found I was not reading it. Either there was not enough time, or I did not have the energy. It takes energy to read serious articles. I suppose that is one reason "fluff" is so popular, it does not take much energy to read it.
I saw a copy of "The Columbian" (a suburban paper printed across the river in Vancouver, Washington) the other day and I was suprised to see that it seemed to be full of hard news and international news. I would not expect that sort of thing from a suburban paper. The "Hillsboro Argus" (our local suburban paper), for instance, does not seem to be bothered by that.
As for our foreign policy? Money talks, and it manages to buy the silence of many.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
