In Copenhagen: a Dane asked me what is ‘happiness’?

Trivia: Did you know that the Danes are the happiest people in the world? Use google please for more info =)

It was a sunny day in Copenhagen with sporadic passing clouds. I wanted to enjoy my afternoon in the city with a glass of wine while people watching, something that is always in my agenda when I am travelling. Luckily, I found an available table at the outdoor terrace of the strategically located ‘Café du Norden’ on Stroget and Kongens Nytorv (the Kings New Square). Here, I met Bj.

That is Bj at my back before we actually met and had a chat.

I always carry my little black notebook with me and my Montblanc pen.

Bj is in his 50’s, lives in Copenhagen and works in the finance industry. He is married and has a daughter. He’s basically spending his afternoon chilling out with a beer in the city while his wife and daughter went to the Louisiana Museum of Modern Art, a unique open-air museum located by Oresund, about 42 kilometres north from the capital city. It is the same museum that I wanted to visit that same day, however, I wasn’t feeling very well so I decided to stay in Copenhagen instead.

We didn’t really talk about the Danish being the happiest people in the world or Denmark being the happiest country. We talked about Copenhagen and what brought me to the city. Then we further talked about travel. We talked about our jobs. We even talked about Christiania. Our discussion went deeper and we talked about life. About happiness.

Different people have different thoughts about what happiness is and what it means to them.

He asked me, ‘So, what is happiness to you?’

To me, happiness is relative. It is something of personal nature. The character, the personality, the person’s personal circumstances and the stage in life this person is in, will determine how that person will view and understand happiness.

Happiness to a 16 year old is different to someone who just recently graduated from university. Moreover, someone who is between 25 and 30 years old, who thinks he or she can conquer the world, will have a different view of happiness compared to a person in his or her mid to late 30’s who have other factors in life to consider, i.e. children, a more stable job, etcetera. When we reach our 40’s, our take on happiness will be different as well—I know this personally because I am at this stage currently. I am sure that reaching our 50’s, 60’s and 70’s, another state of happiness will enter into the picture.

With that, I believe that happiness is a state of achieving contentment, which is a continuous and evolving process throughout the stages of our lives.

If I look back at what made me happy before, it humbles me big time. I have gone so far in life. So I try to hold on to these snippets of my bygone days to keep my feet firmly on the ground. I try to be grateful each day and to always go back to the basics.

I can honestly say that I have gone past the material happiness stuff. I do not anymore feel the nagging need to constantly prove myself, to be accepted by others, to be number 1 at work and to be the best at whatever situations and circumstances I find myself in. Importantly, I have learned that happiness is something that we ultimately can control and can decide.

Right now, what makes me happy are my travels-discovering the world and being with the Dutchman.

Another picture of me and Bj before we actually had the chat.

View on Kongens Nytorv, the Kings New Square.

The afternoon went fast and before we knew it Bj and I have to part ways. His family will be home anytime soon and they are expecting him for dinner while I am faced at the challenge of finding a restaurant.

I thanked Bj for his time and for the thought-provoking discussion we shared.

Now it’s my turn to ask you—What is happiness to you? What will honestly, at this very moment, make you happy? Will you go for it?

There simply aren't enough hours in the day

For some time, I've been contemplating creating a Public Member Tree on ancestry.com. Yesterday I uploaded a small gedcom file to use as a little test. It was created from Legacy using the default options, which essentially means everything would be included, except what was marked as private. Basically, I was trying to determine, and understand, how the data gets parsed and how it displays on a person's profile page.



The file consisted of just a few generations of Mom's ancestors and contained 58 people. Within seconds of uploading the gedcom there appeared 57 ancestry hints! A few minutes later 21 of those people had a total of 194 hints. What is that figure going to be if I upload a database of 5000 dead people? More than a little overwhelming, I think.








I perused about half of those hints and didn't discover any new information. In fact, the stories and photos that I viewed were from my blog or stuff I've shared over the years with other people. The record hints were mostly census records.




As far as how the data displayed - at first it didn't make a lot of sense. I may not like it, but I think I now understand why it is done the way it is.




I was somewhat concerned about the General Notes and Research Notes that I've got in my Legacy file. There's stuff in those Notes that I don't particularly want to share just yet. In the past that was where I put "temporary" information. When I had access to the internet for research and I'd find something it would go there until I got around to reviewing it and entering it into the events or facts for the individual. I've just never gotten back to it. Notes are also where I put the stuff that has not been "proven" to my satisfaction along with thoughts and analysis. Rather like a "holding bin" of sorts. Where other people might have piles of paper on their desk, I've got bunches of notes. The result is the same, it all just sits there waiting for that wonderful time called "round-toit" to show up.




Thankfully, the General Notes and Research Notes in Legacy went into a "Notes" area on the ancestry online tree that appears to be hidden. There is a notation on that screen that "Notes can only be viewed by the owner and by those invited to the tree as an "Editor."




Handling of events was a little strange, I thought.




Events were added to the online tree using the Event Name, Description, Date, and Place as they were in Legacy, which is good. But the "Notes" that I've added for each Legacy event went into an area that is available only by clicking on the "Unsourced Citations" link.






After clicking on the name of the Source Citation another screen displays and you have to click on "(view source details)" to see the entire citation.






This is where the detail information for the source is displayed. If any "Comments" have been added in Legacy regarding the source, they are included in the "Notes" area of the "Source Information" screen.








This is the screen that displays when you click on the "Unsourced Citations" link of an event. The text in the "Other Information" area is the notes that were entered in Legacy for that particular event.




That's a lot of clicking... will anyone click through all those screens to see the details or additional information? Doubtful.




After 2 hours of viewing various people and screens, the test tree was deleted. It had been a long time since I had created a gedcom from Legacy so I spent a little time looking at the options. In the test gedcom, I left the options at the default, which basically means everything would be included, except that marked as private. But there is a little button in the lower right corner that says "customize." Clicking on that button brings up a screen that looks rather intimidating at first.




What's cool is that it allows you to exclude "groups" of items such as Events, Medical Notes, Regular Notes, Research Notes, To-Do Items, and (gasp) even Sources.








The "Customize" screen for exporting a gedcom from Legacy.


I have so many events for some individuals that their profile screen in the online tree was extremely cluttered. I also have a lot of "special" or custom events created for my own use. In addition, I already have a lot of "Census" events so if I were to add the hints for census records as an event in the online tree, there would be a lot of duplication.



What I am now considering is uploading a rather "bare bones" file without events and notes but including sources. Such as they are. Then, I will selectively add "stories" from blog posts (as suggested by Apple) as well as adding "stories" as explanations for some of my conclusions regarding certain relationships.



My database is not perfect. It's not done. It never will be. There are some relationships entered that are purely speculation on my part, and some that are probably outright wrong. But if I wait until everything is "right" it won't ever get put online. On the one hand, I may be adding more misinformation to the multitude of misinformation already out there. Will that come back to haunt me some day? On the other hand, I know I have information that could resolve some of the misinformation on certain families.



So I'm still in a state of flux in deciding whether to put my database online, and if so, how much of it to share. Do I include events and sources? I don't particularly like how the events get imported but I also don't want to spend a lot of time adding things to the online tree. Do I put up a tree with just the ancestors? Or do I include all 5000 deceased persons in the database? Decisions. Decisions.

Guitar Heroes

We have enjoyed having friends around to hang out with here at Peace River. Well, we almost always have friends here.....but they don't usually come over to play Guitar Hero.



Guitar Hero is a great thing to play because it only involves the game, the guitars and then of course players:

This is serious stuff. The games can get pretty intense:

It's almost as much fun to watch as it is to play:

Then there is this:

Please don't ask me to explain it. Because I couldn't if I tried. They are having fun. That's all I know! That's my story and I'm sticking to it.



Living the life in Florida!

A (Pashley) Penny for Your Thoughts

The Pashley Pennyis the companion model to the Parabike I wrote about earlier. This unusual bicycle looks vaguely old-fashioned, but unlike the Parabike it is not based on a specific vintage design. Part cruiser, part mixte and part mountain bike, its uniqueness is enhanced by eccentricities such as the split curved downtubes. The Penny defies classification, and this seems to be how the manufacturer intends it - explaining that the bike "provides the perfect excuse to experience more rural rides."





While the Parabike's aesthetic is defined by the continuous curvature of its top set of twin stays, from head tube to rear dropouts, in the Penny the curve is interrupted and inverted. This difference is so visually dominant that it overshadows the structural similarities between the two bikes. The Penny also lacks the military/historical somberness of the Parabike, coming across as more light-hearted.






Made of cro-moly steel, the Penny is handbrazed and powdercoated in Stratford-upon-Avon in England, like all Pashley bicycles. It is fairly lightweight for its category of bikes, coming in at under 30lb.





Like the Parabike, the Penny is built for 26" wheels and fitted with 26 x 1.75" Schwalbe Marathon tires.Colour-matched fenders and chainguard are included.







Components include a 5-speed Sturmey Archer hub, hand-operated hub brakes front and rear, a Brooks B67S saddle, a Stronglight crankset, non-slip platform pedals, rubbery "faux cork" grips, and a large bell.Unlike the Parabike, the Penny is set up with straight, rather than swept back, handlebars.






Standing over the bicycle for the first time, I was overwhelmed by all the flowy slender tubes; it was a bit like standing over a swaying rope bridge. Not that the tubes sway. It's the form and the repetition that give that impression of movement. A unique design to be sure.






One thing I had wondered about when seeing pictures of the Penny, was whether the stepover was low enough to be practical. Unlike a traditional mixte, the twin parallel stays here don't extend all the way down to the rear dropouts, but connect to the upper seat stays - which places them rather high. However, this is compensated for by their downward sweep. When mounting the bike, the stepover height resembles that of a typical mixte.






Riding the Penny, my first impression was that it felt too small for me (I am just under 5'7"). My test riding partner agreed that the Penny's "cockpit," even with the straight handlebars, felt smaller than the Parabike's. Later I looked up the sizes of the two bikes and was surprised to see them described as the same: 19" (48cm). Of course this measurement refers to the seat tube length, and it's possible that the Penny's virtual top tube is shorter than the Parabike's. Regrettably, I did not measure the bikes and have not been able to source geometry charts. But the good news is that the Penny will work well for smaller riders and those with shorter torsos.




Putting the fit issue aside, the ride quality and handling of the Penny felt very similar to that of the Parabike, which I liked very much: maneuverable, extremely cushy over bumps, mountain-bikey but with a relaxed cruiserish element to it.These are entirely different bikes from Pashley's Roadster and Princess line.Personally, I prefer the way the Penny and Parabike ride to the classic Princess. Of course the looks are a matter of taste.






One advantage of the Penny over the Parabike, is that - to my eye at least - its aesthetics do not conflict with a standard rear rack. So turning it into a practical city bike would be fairly simple. Unfortunately, dynamo lighting is not included. Also not included are the waterbottle cage mounts that I noticed on the Parabike. Step-through frame designs often do not lend themselves to this, and it's too bad. Finally, I am not sure why the Penny was set up with straight handlebars rather than swept-back bars - I suspect that much of this bike's target market would find the the latter more comfortable.





In their description of the Penny, Pashley suggests that this bike is meant to move effortlessly between town and country. I can see that. Provided that it's a fairly flat area, this bike could feel equally enjoyable to ride through meadows and forests, on cobblestones and on busy city streets, for shorter and longer distances. It is a nice combination of comfortable, maneuverable, and intuitive to handle. The durable powdercoat and the enclosed brakes and gears allow outdoor storage and make this bike a good choice for winter and inclement weather conditions. If the unique look of the Penny appeals to you, the bike is worth taking seriously.






The Pashley Penny is available in "willow green" (shown here) or "dusk blue" - a dusty indigo. Current retail price is $1,195. Both the Parabike and Penny are available for test rides at Harris Cyclery in West Newton, MA. Many thanks to them for setting up these demo bikes.

Bush wack!

I still have scars on my shins from two of last summer's adventures.



My plan was to stay on the snow and my skis as long as possible this year with the amazing NW snow pack. Avoiding new scars was the thought.Then I saw this.Nice reminder. Make sure to dbl click the picture.













If you are intoREALadventure skiing..plenty of iton these twogreat blogs.



http://slcsherpa.blogspot.com/



http://slc-samurai.blogspot.com/



SLC? Who'd thought...the Chamonix of the USA? But with bush wacking. It is afterall an American tradition!







Dbl click..amazing pictures.All photo credits here to both the Sherpa and Samari blogs.

2 Raincoats: Nau Succinct Trench and Lululemon Ride On Rain Jacket

It's been raining here all week, so the timing seems right to review some raincoats. For three years now I've been looking for a lightweight, waterproof, breathable raincoat that works well on a city bike, but found nothing. Now I've suddenly come across two. On the left is the Succinct Trench by Nau, purchased by me a few months ago via a discount website. On the right is the Ride On Rain Jacket by Lululemon, sent to me for review by the manufacturer. Both raincoats fit my requirements well.






The Lululemon "Ride On" Rain Jacket is a rather avant-garde looking raincoat that hits a few inches above the knees in the front and an inch or so below the back of the knees in the rear. It has the same Edwardian theme as the blazer reviewed earlier, but here it is consistent and harmonious throughout the garment. The jacket is very thin and feels suitable for temperatures in the mid 40°s - mid 70°s Fahrenheit.





The jacket is waterproof and breathable,lined with a soft, thin fabricthroughout. Lululemon uses cryptic proprietary names to describe their fabrics, and the stuff this jacket is made of is called "atmosphere." It is crinkly and easy to scrunch up and stuff into a pannier when not in use. It weighs very little. An inner drawcord at the waist makes the fit of this jacket adjustable. Overall the fit is pretty loose, but tightening the drawcord gives it a tailored, flattering look. Another drawcord controls the hem.





When the hem is let out, it is pretty flowy. Tightening the drawcord offers better protection from the rain.






The sleeves are extra long, featuring cuffs with reflective detailing.






There is an inner and an outer zipper, the purpose of which I do not entirely understand. Lululemon calls this a "double zipper." However, neither of them are two-way, and the jacket cannot be unzipped from the bottom.






The front pockets have smallish zippered openings outlined with reflective ribbon They are very roomy inside and are lined with a soft, pleasant fabric. There is also an inner pocket.





The collar zips up high and can be used in leu of a scarf. The hood is large enough to fit over a bicycle helmet, of so desired. It is is adjustable via a drawstring, but is not detachable.







TheLululemon "Ride On" Rain Jacket works well for cycling because it is lightweight, waterproof, breathable, stretchy, makes minimal rustling noise, has longer than standard sleeves, and provides good rain coverage via a combination of its length and drawcord hem. At the same time it is sufficiently elegant to wear as part of an everyday, non-technical wardrobe. As far as criticisms: I found the fit of the hood to be less than optimal, with a slight tendency to obscure my peripheral vision unless I move it out of the way or push it back a bit. Hi-viz lovers might be disappointed by the subtlety of the reflective details, but this jacket is also available in orange (and black). The $298 price tag may or may not be a deal breaker, depending on what you are used to. And of course the flowing, Edwardian style is not everyone's cup of tea. Would I have bought this jacket for myself? Not at full retail price, but yes if it went on sale and if I did not already own the Nau trench (see below). After this review I will be giving it away locally. You can read another review of this jacket by Dottie on Let's Go Ride a Bike.




The Nau Succinct Trenchresembles a classic Barbour-style English field coat. It hits mid-thigh and is gently tailored at the waist. Made of an ultra-thin shell material, it is waterproof, breathable and lightweight,suitable for temperatures in the mid40°s - mid 70°s Fahrenheit. The fabric is described as "recycled polyester."






The jacket shown here is the model and the colour of the current model is a little different: The latter has black buttons instead of silver and a very subtle black-on-black plaid pattern. In all other ways they are the same (I asked the manufacturer).







The Nau trench is simple, compact and decidedly utilitarian in design. Those who do not like to fuss with drawcords and adjust things back and forth, will enjoy its intuitive versatility.






The two-way zipper and rear vent make it easy to adjust the width of the hem for pedaling, walking, and other activities .





The roomy, covered pockets feature both zip and snap closure, allowing both easy access of weather-proofing.





The stand-up collar can be buttoned up to protect the neck from rain and wind, or let out.






The waist is adjustable.




Only the upper 3rd of the trench is lined, reducing weight and bulk.






The detachable, visored hood features both a zipper,snap closure and a hidden draw-cord, allowing for a number of micro-adjustments for optimal fit.





The NauSuccinct Trench works well for cycling because it is lightweight, waterproof, breathable, easy to move in, makes minimal rustling noise, has longer than standard sleeves, and provides coverage of the derriere and upper thighs. A classic design, it is sufficiently elegant to wear as part of an everyday, non-technical wardrobe and is unlikely to go out of style over the next few years. The detachable hood offers extra versatility, and does not obscure peripheral vision. As far as criticisms: Making the trench slightly longer would provide better rain coverage for cyclists. Adding a few reflective elements will be attractive to those who require that their rain jacket be hi-viz. Personally I would love to see this jacket in a classic colour other than black - for instance olive green. The $275 price tag may or may not be a deal breaker, depending on what you are used to. I bought mine for 40% off via a discount retailer at the end of last season, and those who find the retail price too high can always wait, stalk, and do the same.



I find both the Nau Succinct Trench and the Lululemon Ride on Rain Jacket to be flattering, practical, and cycling-appropariate, assuming that you ride an upright bike and are looking for a raincoat that is suitable as everyday clothing. The Lululemon jacket is probably the more stylish of the two considering current trends, but it is also the more likely to look dated a couple of years down the road. For me, that skews things in favour of the Nau trench, but others' preferences may differ. Both raincoats are good examples of cycling-appropriate apparel. By comparison, my older raincoat is considerably bulkier and more constricting on the bike. I am glad to have finally found a replacement.

Good-Bye 'Blueskies' ...Hello Blueprints

A couple of days ago, Seymour Blueskies packed up his things and went home with a very nice couple. I bid him farewell as I fondly recalled our times together.



From the start, my intent had been not to keep the vintage Trek, but to learn what I could from it, then move on to explore other bicycles. It was around this time that I recognised having two categories of bikes: a few that I "truly owned" and others that I considered transient and experimental. But experimental for what?



It took me some time to acknowledge that I was "seriously" interested in bicycle design, and acquiring theTreklast summer coincided with that realisation. I began to learn about bicycle history and frame geometry in a more systematic manner, to formulate ideas about the relationship between form and function, and to apply my previous training (in psychology and neuroscience, as well as art and design) to the realm of bicycles and cycling. I realised that the reason I keep acquiring more bikes, is not because I necessarily want to own them personally, but because I want to try out new ideas and to learn new things - then share the results with others. I enjoy the process of conceptualising a bicycle, then bringing about its existence and the result being successful. Now if only there was some way to do that over and over again, without ending up in financial ruin or with a hoarding disorder... Oh, I know: I could design bikes for other people.



After saying good-bye to Seymour Blueskies, I stopped by to see Bryan at Royal H. Cycles - with whom I am now collaborating on a bicycle. How on Earth did that happen? Well, funny story... You see, in this post about a month ago, I expressed a desire to try a bicycle with traditional randonneuring geometry (à la Jan Heine), and received some suggestions as to how this could be accomplished. There wasn't an easy way; these bicycles are rare. But one idea was that I could design the bike myself - and an intrepid reader was prepared to commission just such a bicycle from Royal H should I feel up to the task. And so here we are. The plan is that I come up with the specs, we discuss, Bryan builds, and we'll see what happens.



As this project begins and the Bella Ciao project nears completion, I am filled with nervous energy and self-doubt all around. I know my weak points: I am not an engineer and I am not a framebuilder. But I am perceptive and increasingly knowledgeable in other ways that are essential to bicycle design, and I do feel that I can collaborate with others to create something special. It's possible that I am over-reaching, that it's all too soon. But life is short and you never know unless you try. So I'm trying.