S. Evan Townsend's Blog, page 26

Why Do (Most of Us) Drive on the Right Side?

This is based on one of my first Toastmasters speeches. 
In most of the world, we drive on the right side of the road. There are exceptions, most notably the UK and Australia. 

But why do we drive on the right? In the US, we drive on the right because the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices as required by Code of Federal Regulations, Title 23 Part 655.603 says you drive on the right.

But why the right?  And what do Napoleon, Hitler, and early 20th century manners have to do with the way you drive?

They all influenced which side of the road you drive on and help to explain why most countries drive on the right side but some drive on the left.

Driving on the left side of the road with right-hand drive actually makes more sense, especially if you're right handed and drive a stick.  You can shift with your left hand and steer (the more critical function) with your right.  And since most people are right handed, this would be the best set up for most drivers.   But today, about 2/3rds of the world's population drives on the right side and 1/3 on the left.

An interesting situation I noticed when visiting there is the U.S. Virgin Island of St. Thomas where they have left hand drive vehicles like in the U.S., but drive on the left side of the road like in the U.K.

Some say regulations about which side of the road to travel on date back as far as 1100 B.C. when Chinese law declared the right side of the road was for men, the left side for women, and carriages take the middle.  It is unknown how many head-on collisions this caused.

For centuries, people passed each other on the right and travelled on the left.  This was, some say, because in both Western and Asian cultures, the left side of the body was considered "dirty" or "sinister."  Or it may have been people wanted to have their strong hand (and weapons) closer to the stranger they were passing on the road.  Knights would pass on the left (and joust on the left) to keep their strong arm ready for battle.

The Romans are apparently among the first to "drive" on the left side of the road.  Chariot drivers held the reins with their right hand and their whip with their left.   To avoid whipping oncoming drivers, they would drive on the left side of the road.

Wagon wheel ruts at a Roman quarry show that the rock-laden wagons made deeper ruts on one side of the road than the other.  Going away from the quarry, the deeper ruts were on the left side.  So it wasn't just the chariots that drove on the left side of the road during the Roman era.

But Napoleon changed that.   Imagine two columns of soldiers marching toward each other, pikes and bayonets slung over the right shoulder.   Passing on right, these weapons would become entangled, chaos ensue, and that deadly enemy in war, delay, take hold.  So Napoleon decreed his soldiers would march on the right and pass on the left.  

There is also speculation that there was an anti-aristocrat motivation in traveling on the right side of the road.  Before the French Revolution, aristocrats' carriages traveled on the left side and slower-moving peasants were relegated to the right side of the road.   After the revolution, aristocrats hoping to keep their heads, started moving on the right side of the road.  And there's evidence of a "keep right" law in Paris as early as 1794.

As we all know, Napoleon conquered, for a while, a great deal of Europe, including Germany.  And he brought his "drive-on-the-right" standardization to the countries he invaded.  Hitler took drive on the right to more countries as he conquered Eastern Europe. 

The British, neither conquered by Napoleon nor Hitler, to this day drive on the left, so do most of its former colonies (American probably had more of an influence on Canada's driving habits than Mother England although some maritime provinces and British Columbia initially drove on the left).

But what about America?  We weren't conquered by Napoleon or Hitler, either.  Yet we drive on the right.  No, we were conquered by mass production and the Model-T Ford, which had left hand controls.  And left-hand controls means driving on the right.   Why did Henry Ford choose to give his mass-produced car left-hand drive?  According to a sales brochure it was for the convenience for passengers exiting directly onto the curb, "especially... if there is a lady to be considered."  With the popularity of the Model T, other car makers had no choice but to standardize on left hand drive.

And, America, being the biggest economy and biggest producer of cars after World War II, most likely spread drive-on-the-right to most other countries.  

An interesting note: in Italy, sports cars were often produced with right hand drive because that was considered the proper set up for racing, in case the car was ever to be raced.  This despite Italy being a drive-on-the-right country.

And that's probably more than you wanted to know about why Americans drive on the right.

Howard the Duck vs. Who Framed Roger Rabbit

One weekend recently I watched two 80s movies. One was Howard the Duck from 1986 and the other was Who Framed Roger Rabbit from 1988. Howard the Duck was on DVD and Roger Rabbit was in 4K UHD on Disney+.

Howard the Duck bombed at the box office despite George Lucas's name being attached to it. It has occasional amusing moments but mostly it was dumb. And the 80s stop-motion especial effects weren't very good, either. I remember one reviewer saying (and I paraphrase from memory) "$35 million and the duck still looked like a kid in a costume." And he did. There are six people credited as "Howard T. Duck." I wonder if they were the people in the duck costume. And the music was intrusive to the movie instead of enhancing it.

And the humor just wasn't there. It was an expensive production, over the top even, and not very funny. According the the Internet Movie Database, it made almost $3 million worldwide. Which likely didn't cover the promotional budget.

Then there's Who Framed Roger Rabbit. According the the Internet Movie Database, it cost $70 million but it made nearly $350 million worldwide. I remember watching it in the theater in 1988 and being blown away by it. Here were cartoon characters from Disney and Warner Brothers and MGM on the same screen. The special effects never looked cheap. In fact, at times they were amazing. At the time I had no idea how cartoon characters could interact with human actors. And the animation is unbelievable. It's so good. Even the music is good, enhancing the film noir feeling of the movie

And it's hilarious. If you like cartoons (and even if you don't), the movie is funny. The climax is a little intense. But I never thought the movie was for children, anyway. 

So contrast Howard the Duck with Roger Rabbit. One was a hit, one wasn't. One was funny and amazing, one was treacle and stupid with bad special effects. One I highly recommend (especially if you appreciate the art of hand-drawn cartoons) the other I say avoid.

How do you like these films? Let me know in the comments below.

The Tyranny of Red Dots

I have an iPhone. Since smartphones came out I have had nothing but iPhones except my first smartphone was an HTC piece of junk (this probably was it; I thought I'd like it because of its physical keyboard). I was so glad to be rid of it and get an iPhone.

But, there is one thing I don't like about iPhones. This would probably be true for any smartphone, I supposed. And that is, I hate red dots. I call it the "tyranny of red dots." If I have a red dot on my phone, which is a notification, I HAVE TO clear it and clear it now.

That means opening the app and figuring out why there are red dots. Sometimes the dots don't go away. Like on the Reminders app, I'll clear the reminder and the red dot will linger for a while. I hate that. Sometimes that happens on the mail and the phone, too.

Wife's emailMy wife has Gmail on her phone and her mail app has a red dot with over 3,500 notifications in it. I don't know how she stands it. It would drive me nuts. See picture to the right.

This is probably due to my OCD about technology. My real life desk is a mess but my desktop on my computer is neat and clean.

One time recently, I had a red dot on Facebook Business Suite (the old Facebook Pages app). And I couldn't get rid of it. It drove me nuts. I eventually realized it was caused by a comment to a post on my page and when I read the comment, it went away. Still, it bugged me for at least an hour.

How do you feel about the red dots? Do you have to clear them now? Or are you like my wife. Let me know in the comments below.

Move Review: Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai

A while back I watched a YouTube video called 10 Amazing Movies You Probably Haven't Seen (And Why) And I'd seen about half of them and some I didn't want to see (because they are horror or didn't look interesting). So I immediately put the three I hadn't seen and I thought I might enjoy on my Netflix DVD.com queue. 

First to come was Chef, which I liked.

Then came Bowfinger, which I also liked.

The last movie to come was Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai. Which I hate to say, while interesting and original, I didn't like it very much. It stars Forest Whitaker was the Ghost Dog, a mob hitman who tries to live by the code of the samurai. One problem is, that Whitaker is fat. I'm not fat-shaming, but a samurai should be in shape, I would think. Even if his primary weapon is a gun.

One thing the movie makers did accomplish was making Ghost Dog sympathetic as a mob hitman. But the movie is overlong and boring in parts. There's not a lot of action nor comedy. But I'm not sure it was supposed to be a comedy. I'm not sure what it was supposed to be.

So, see Chef and Bowfinger. But only see this movie if you're looking for something different... very different. 

Have you seen Ghost Dog? Did you like it or not? Let me know in the comments below.

100 Days!

Today marks 100 days until University of Washington Huskies football starts with a home game against Montana. No time has been set yet. Montana is an FCS school, so it should be a nice warmup win for the Dawgs. But after that they play Michigan in Michigan and that will be a tough game.

After last season, I need football. The Huskies played four games total last year, losing one (for some reason, we can't beat Stanford except in 2016). I was so desperate for some football I ended up watching the Seattle Seahawks more than I normally would. 

I went to college (a lot) at the University of Washington but when I really got into Husky football is when I went to a few games. Seventy-thousand people yelling for the same thing does something to the psyche. I discussed that in detail before.

It's interesting. When I was a kid I hated sports of all kinds. I would turn on the TV to watch something I wanted to watch on one of the two channels we had, and there would be sports running long. That's when I learned that the last two minutes in football can take forever. Really made me angry.

Of course I still hate baseball, basketball, and soccer. 

But Husky football, I love. 

What sports are you looking forward to? Or are you not into sports at all? Let me know in the comments below.

What Five Things Influenced Me to Be a Writer...

I tell people I started writing when I was 12. This is pretty much true. But I was always making up stories in my head, usually involving what I built out of Legos.

My sister, who is four years older than I, brought home her touch type instruction book from high school. I used it, and her typewriter, to teach myself how to type. I then started writing. But what influenced me to become a writer?

1) Television: As a kid I watched way too much television. But, in a way, that's where I learned to tell a story. 

2) Star Trek (the original series): When my local television station started running Star Trek reruns in the afternoon just after I got home from High School, I watched religiously. There were two episodes they didn't show, however, "What are Little Girls Made Of?" and the last episode, "Turnabout Intruder." I had to see those later. (I think the television in my small, very conservative area of Idaho found them unacceptable.) But Star Trek is what made me a science fiction writer.

3) Books: What writer wasn't influence by the books he read. And I read, of course, science fiction books.

4) Robert Heinlein: Speaking of books. In an about four-year period from 1986 to 1990, I read every Robert Heinlein book in print. And I love most of them (he had a couple of early clunkers like his first juvenile with Nazis on the Moon). But man, could he write. And I wanted to write like him.

5) Star Wars: In the sixties and seventies, science fiction tended to be boring and depressing or both. Then the original Star Wars movie came along (and its two sequels) and I realized science fiction could be fun. 

Those five things are the primary influences that made me a writer. Well, that and I've always told stories. 

What influenced you to do what you do? If you write, what influenced that? Let me know in the comments below.

Movie Review: Bowfinger

I recently watched the movie Bowfinger. I'm not exactly sure why or how I missed this movie when it first came out in 1999. Maybe because Rotten Tomatoes only gave it a 68%. But it is hilarious.

Steve Martin plays Bowfinger, a down-on-his-luck movie producer/con man. Eddie Murphy plays a dual role as a big star Bowfinger wants in his latest movie (Chubby Rain) and as the star's brother. 

Steve Martin and Eddie Murphy, what could go wrong?

The comedy comes when Murphy's star character, Kit Ramsey, turns down Bowfinger's movie but Bowfinger decides to make the movie anyway, with Ramsey in it. That's when the fun begins. 

Heather Graham plays a sweet (or is she) girl trying for stardom and Robert Downey Jr. is a big Hollywood producer. Christine Baranski plays an actress who is so into her trade, she can't see what's happening.

I really enjoyed this movie. Two thumb up! 

Have you seen Bowfinger? What did you think? Let me know in the comments below.

Do We All See the Same Color

This is something I've been wondering since I was a kid (along with "why do I exist?" "why do I see out of these eyes?). 

When I look at red, I see a color. But does everyone else see the same color? What I see as red, you might see what I would call "blue." There's no way to know. You've called it "red" all your life. I've called it "blue" all my life. But until we can see what others see, there's no way to know.

Now, I find this unlikely. The color of light is determined by its wavelength because light is electromagnetic radiation (just like radio waves and infrared and microwaves you use to pop popcorn). So when electromagnetic radiation (EMR) of a certain frequency hits your retina, it sends a signal to your brain saying "this is this color of light." But does your brain interpret that input the same as my brain.

I suppose someday if we can see what others see though technology, we might confirm that red is red for everyone. Until then, this is pure speculation.

Do you think everyone sees the same colors? Or do you think I'm nuts? Let me know in the comments below.

UPDATE: I just read an article that says this is a common dorm-room discussion. I never stayed in the dorms when I was in college, so I guess I never had this discussion.

Movie Review: Chef

I recently watched the movie Chef. It was made in 2014 and somehow flew under my radar for good movies. It was produced, written, and directed by . He also played the lead role, the chef.

The film is about a chef who gets a bad restaurant review mostly because his boss, played by Dustin Hoffman, wouldn't let him change the menu from what's popular to what's best. When his young son hooks him up with Twitter, things get worse as he doesn't understand the difference between a reply and a DM. Then he explodes at the critic in public and, of course, someone records it and it goes viral. Then he gets fired/quits.

Favreau pulls in a few of his MCU actors to help out including Scarlett Johansson and Robert Downey Jr.

But the best part of this movie is his relationship with his young son who helps him back on the road to redemption, including renewing his relationship with his son, which at the beginning of the movie was strained (the chef is divorced and gets visitation on weekends). The boy is a bit too precocious with social media and social media is a little too successful at helping the chef's new venture: a food truck. But it still works.

The movie is a bit food porny. Just watching Favreau's character make a grilled cheese sandwich will make you drool. 

I recommend watching Chef for a feel-good movie. It starts a little slow and heavy, but gets better as it goes. It's rated R for language and some discussions about sex, and otherwise would have made a good family film. If you haven't seen it, check it out.

Star Trek Movies Ranked from Best to Worst

Last week I went through the "Star Wars" movies and ordered them from best to worst. Now I'm going to do that for "Star Trek" moves. And there are a lot of them (14 unless I missed one).

1. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn (1982)

What, not Star Trek IV? Nope. This movie is a great conflict between two strong characters, each with a starship to express their strengths. Ricardo Montalbán does an amazing job as Kahn, reprising his role from the television series. He makes a nasty villain. A fun, intense and ultimately powerful movie.

2. Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986)

While it gets a little preachy, this fish-out-of-water tale (I'm talking about the Enterprise crew in 1980s San Francisco and not the whales who aren't fish anyway) is hilarious at times and yet there's a quest that needs to be finished.

3. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991)

 Klingons spouting Shakespeare and Sulu with his own ship, this fast and fun movie has an amazing climatic battle. The one thing I disagree with is Klingon blood is not pink. 

4. Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984)

Yes, there was a new actor play Savik (and not doing as good a job) but Christopher Lloyd plays against type as the Klingon villain. Sometimes funny and sometimes moving.

5. Galaxy Quest (1999)

Yes, I'm serious. This parody of all things Star Trek is an hilarious sendup of the whole sub-culture. If you're a fan of Star Trek, you have to see this movie.

6: Star Trek: First Contact (1996)

The best of the Next Generation movies involves the Borg and the first use of warp speed by humans. While this introduced the Borg Queen, a concept I don't like, the action sequences are well done and exciting.

7: Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979)

Don't hire Robert Wise to direct science fiction. This director of The Sound of Music was in over his head. Slow and boring (sometimes called the "no motion picture") this movie also contains the horrible line: "It fell into what they used to call a black hole." I mean, who talks like that? "They came here in what they used to call a horseless carriage."

8: Star Trek: Insurrection (1998)

Again, a Next Generation film, this is a movie that needed work from the get-go. With a lackluster script this movie had issues. It has interesting parts, but mostly it's just boring. And the "Captain Picard Single Combat Warrior" ending just annoys me. In the series everyone worked together to solve the problems.

9: Star Trek: Generations (1994)

The first of the Next Generation movies. They attempted to "pass the torch" from the original series crew. But it wasn't handled very well and there are so many plot holes and violations of Star Trek canon, it just doesn't work.

10. Star Trek (2009)

The J.J. Abrams reboot/Kelvin timeline that I barely acknowledge. This is the one movie that is watchable. It's amusing to view and occasionally fun. And it does have the first product placement in any Star Trek movie. And Zoe Saldana almost makes it worth watching.

11.  Star Trek: Nemesis (2002)

The last Next Generation move, the plot was overwrought, the climatic battle was unbelievable, and the whole thing was rather boring. 

12. Star Trek into Darkness (2013)

At one point in this movie, Alice Eve strips down to her underwear. Completely gratuitously.  Other than that, there is nothing good about his J.J. Abrams movie. Although Zoe Saldana almost makes it worth watching.

13. Star Trek Beyond (2016)

The last (so far) of the J.J. Abrams abominations. Again, not very good. Although Zoe Saldana almost makes it worth watching.

14. Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989)

 Directed by William Shatner, this movie is awful, terrible, and not well done. "Why does God need a starship?" Well, I guess it's not God after all. Just avoid this movie altogether.

Am I nuts? Do you agree with my list and the order they are in? Let me know in the comments below.