The unspoken message? “Why don’t you old geezer-men <\/em>just give up<\/strong>?<\/strong><\/em>”<\/p>\n She could have easily asked the same question of two other<\/em> old geezers \u2013 aged 63 and 69 \u2013 who planned a canoe trip 12 miles out into the Gulf of Mexico, off the Mississippi coast. (And well<\/em> into the realm of sharks, drownings, and other potential catastrophes.) \u00a0That was us – my brother and I – last November, eight days of primitive camping on isolated offshore islands and the occasional salt marsh. (And<\/em> against the advice of my older geezer’s sensible<\/em> daughter…)<\/p>\n For one answer we can turn to John Steinbeck. He began Part Two of his book Travels with Charley<\/em> by noting that most men his age get told – constantly – to \u201cslow down<\/em>.\u201d \u00a0(The object being to \u201ctrade their violence for a small increase in life span.\u201d) But that wasn\u2019t his way:<\/p>\n I did not want to surrender fierceness for a small gain in yardage\u2026\u00a0 If this projected journey should prove too much then it was time to go anyway.\u00a0 I see too many men delay their exits with a sickly, slow reluctance to leave the stage.\u00a0 It\u2019s bad theater as well as bad living<\/strong>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n That post included what Steinbeck said in Travels with Charley<\/a><\/em>, and what Robert Louis Stevenson<\/a> said in his 1879 book, Travels with a Donkey in the C\u00e9vennes<\/a><\/em>. The point being – to Ms. Wloszczyna<\/a> and others like her – that the problem<\/em> has been around a long, long<\/em> time, and is not likely to go away any time soon.<\/p>\n It is true – as she notes – that “Nolte\u2019s wheezy scalawag can barely stumble out of a small plane.” (Which made me wonder as well: \u00a0How could his character really<\/em> hike as far as the movie said he did.) \u00a0It’s also true that there’s “an R-rated abundance of salty language, what with Bryson prone to expressing what a bear does in the\u00a0woods\u00a0and Katz\u2019s committed embrace of the F-word.” \u00a0But her comment about the “lack of\u00a0deep revelations or bouts of philosophizing along the way” suggested that she doesn’t know men very well.<\/p>\n (We have our flaws, but we are<\/strong> good for one or two good things around the house…<\/em>)<\/p>\n On the other hand, she did<\/em> get the connection with\u00a0Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid<\/a>:<\/p>\n Oddly enough, there is a scene that briefly summons memories of Butch and Sundance when the guys [Redford and Nolte] are trapped on a ledge and peer over a harrowing incline to see a body of water below. I kept hoping they would jump in together. \u00a0But it was not to be.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Which brings us back to Wloszczyna<\/a>‘s question: \u00a0“Can you justify sitting through an utterly predictable and rather tame man vs. nature ramble?” The answer – for me anyway, and others as well – is a hearty “Yes!<\/strong><\/em>”\u00a0 (Especially true after having watched the definitely-creepy movie “The Gift<\/a>” just the day before.)<\/p>\n A Walk in the Woods<\/a> has flaws. I found myself asking – throughout the film – “Why in the world would he do that?<\/em>” \u00a0(Or the variation, “Why would he do it that way?”<\/em>) Why would the Redford character pick the Nolte character to tag along, when he would clearly be better off hiking alone? \u00a0(Having hiked portions of the Trail myself by now, I can say it’s definitely not “lonely.”) \u00a0And why would he commit to hiking the whole length of the Trail, without even considering<\/em> a preliminary or test* overnight-hike or two?<\/p>\n Which is pretty much the same mistake my brother Tim and I made back in 1967.<\/p>\n Back then we<\/em> were stupid teenagers. \u00a0(Or is that redundant?) \u00a0Plus, we had “sensible” parents who should have known better. \u00a0One answer is that life is fraught with flaws, so sometimes it’s “good<\/em><\/strong> theater” to show life as it really is, or will<\/em> be if and when you make stupid mistakes. And\u00a0Fact-Checking \u201cA Walk<\/a>\u201d offered some positive<\/em>\u00a0things about the film.<\/p>\n For one, it’s about “novice hikers who attempt to complete the trail.” (In itself a recipe for disaster.) \u00a0For another thing it’s “a movie about nature\u2019s majesty.”\u00a0 (Not<\/em><\/strong> about “philosophizing<\/a>.”)\u00a0 And third:<\/p>\n The Appalachian Trail Conservancy has said that additional ridgerunners<\/a> will be hired in anticipation of an influx of hikers motivated by \u201cA Walk in the Woods\u201d to check out the famous footpath.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Fourth, the reviewer noted many “greenhorns” he met as a ridgerunner “were dangerously unprepared or ridiculously over-packed.” \u00a0Also, “the most common source of trail stress I encountered were people with blisters and other foot ailments caused by brand new boots or excessive mileage.” \u00a0Then too the director himself noted, “In our story it was important that Redford\u2019s character doesn\u2019t really know why he\u2019s doing it<\/em><\/strong>.”<\/p>\n Which I suppose is an viable comment on men in general, and especially older<\/em> men, on the verge or past<\/em> the verge of “Geezer-dom.” \u00a0Sometimes we do things just for the hell of it.<\/p>\n (“Oh, and women<\/strong> never do things ‘they know not why?'”)<\/em><\/p>\n But the best part of the Fact-Checking<\/a>\u00a0review? \u00a0The part where the director –\u00a0Ken Kwapis<\/a>\u00a0– said that he doesn’t pay any attention to – or even read – those negative reviews:<\/p>\n Didn\u2019t read a one of those reviews. \u00a0As people say, if you\u2019re going to believe the good ones, you have to believe the bad ones, so I ignore all of them…<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Which provides another valuable lesson. \u00a0“Sometimes you should just ignore the critics.”<\/p>\n For all these reasons and more,\u00a0A Walk in the Woods<\/a>\u00a0is definitely a film worth seeing. \u00a0If you’re into that sort of thing.<\/em> \u00a0And even if – or perhaps because<\/em><\/strong> – “every female [in the film] exists to simply serve the needs of the central male characters.” \u00a0(As Ms. Wloszczyna<\/a>\u00a0alleged<\/em>.)<\/p>\n But don’t just take my word for it. \u00a0Mi Dulce<\/a><\/em><\/b>\u00a0liked the film almost<\/em> as much as I did…<\/p>\n \u00a0 The upper image is courtesy of\u00a0Kristen Schaal Talks A Walk in the Woods<\/a><\/em>: “Kristen Schaal is one of those trusted comedic talents who, whenever she pops up in a TV show or film, you know she\u2019ll leave an impression… \u00a0[In “Woods” she] plays\u00a0a fellow trail hiker who is also a know-it-all\u00a0annoyance.”<\/em><\/p>\n And speaking of\u00a0\u201cevery female [in the film] exists to simply serve the needs of the central male characters…\u201d \u00a0 It’s hard to see how the\u00a0Kristen Schaal<\/a>\u00a0character fit into that\u00a0stereotype<\/a><\/em>…<\/em><\/p>\n Re: director Ken Kwapis<\/a>\u00a0and what he<\/strong> learned. \u00a0He added that after “reading the book and making this movie, I came home and realized I could barely identify any of the trees in my own backyard. \u00a0So it has encouraged me to better see what\u2019s right in front of my face.”<\/em><\/p>\n The lower image is courtesy of On canoeing 12 miles offshore<\/a>. \u00a0Yours truly<\/strong> took the picture just after the dawn of a morning when we two geezer-canoeists got up at 3:00 a.m. \u00a0(The object was to negotiate the Gulf of Mexico before the wind stirred up the waves.) \u00a0We paddled 17 miles in 11 hours, in two separate canoes . \u00a0And aside from the occasional “siesta at sea,” the only break we took was a one-hour stopover on Cat Island<\/a><\/em>, some seven miles off the Mississippi coast.<\/em><\/p>\n * \u00a0 * \u00a0 * \u00a0 *<\/p>\n \u00a0Which brings up the wisdom of doing “a preliminary or test* overnight-hike or two.” \u00a0 (Something the Redford character failed to even consider in the film.)<\/em><\/p>\n Which is being interpreted: \u00a0My “failure” back in 1967 has always stuck in my craw. \u00a0But at this\u00a0late\u00a0stage of my life I know I’ll probably never hike the whole Trail, or even the 623-mile segment from Springer Mountain to Gettysburg. \u00a0On the other hand I am<\/strong> determined to hike segments of the Trail, one in each state it passes through, and preferably in three- or four-day segments.<\/em><\/p>\n To that end, I’ve done two three-hour hikes, one north and south of where U.S. 64 intersects the Trail near Franklin, North Carolina. \u00a0The second test-hike was “to” Springer Mountain, but from the other end. \u00a0(So to speak.) \u00a0That is, from the trailhead in Google Maps as “Three Forks USFS 58 4.3, Appalachian Trail, Blue Ridge, GA.” (That would be “U.S. Forest Service Road.”) \u00a0And for both test-hikes I wore a 22-pound weight vest, for training purposes.<\/em><\/p>\n My next project is a 27-mile hike from where U.S. 64 intersects the Trail, up to\u00a0Wesser NC<\/a><\/em>. \u00a0The question is whether it’ll take two or three days. \u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n![\"November](\"http:\/\/i1177.photobucket.com\/albums\/x350\/jbpermar\/Canoe%20trip%202014\/IMG_4329_zps7f7b5ddb.jpg\")
For the full<\/em> answer see\u00a0On canoeing 12 miles offshore<\/a>, posted last May 23. (With the image at right, with the answer, “For moments like this!<\/em>“)<\/p>\n![\"November](\"http:\/\/i1177.photobucket.com\/albums\/x350\/jbpermar\/Canoe%20trip%202014\/IMG_4332_zps47e076b9.jpg\")
“Siesta at sea,” 12 miles offshore. \u00a0(An experience a “stay-at-home” will never have…)<\/em><\/p>\n