Citing national security, President Bush exempted the U.S. Navy from a judge's order to cease sonar use in areas frequented by marine mammals ...
... the National Marine Fisheries Service said that the Atlantic white marlin did not meet requirements to be included on the Endangered Species List ...
... a report by the U.K. Marine Climate Change Impacts Partnership found that seas around the U.K. were becoming more violent, thanks to rising water levels and increased carbon dioxide ...
... a Japanese whaling ship detained two activists that were accused of throwing acid and illegally boarding their vessel ...
... Chinese officials warned that the cities of Shanghai and Tianjin face threats from rising sea levels. They also found that 145,000 square miles of coastal area nationwide were still severely polluted ...
... marine archaeologists planned to explore the lost city of Dunwich, off England's Suffolk coast. The city, once the capital of East Anglia 1,500 years ago, succumbed to coastal erosion ...
... a starfish outbreak was found to be deciminating corals in Asia's Coral Triangle area. The starfish excrete digestive juices to liquify the reefs ...
... zebra mussels, an invasive species, were discovered in California ...
... customs officials seized an illegal shipment of live corals at Manchester Airport in England. Worth £50,000, the seizure was the largest yet in the U.K ...
... Fort Lauderdale was ordered to dim coastal lights in preparation for the 2008 sea turtle nesting season ...
... British scientists discovered flowing lakes beneath Antarctica's ice shelf ...
... and 22 bald eagles died after diving into an uncovered truck of fish slime that was left outside a seafood processing plant in Alaska.
Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change
Tweet for the bees
Comments
View as Threaded
caniscandida Posted 8:25 pm
19 Jan 2008
The fact is, Dunwich was NOT a fabled great city, renowned in folklore and ballads. Nor, apparently, did it become "lost" as the result of a catastrophe or cataclysm.
All the same, sure, it is a not unimportant historical site, and no doubt the underwater archeologists still can tell us a lot of interest about Anglo-Saxon-to-Norman settlements and urbanism in the Early Middle Ages.
Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 8:34 pm
19 Jan 2008
The interviewed jogger should be strung up as a bad example, for acting so entitled, that her demand to have her nighttime jogging routine illuminated by bright lights should of course take priority over any other kind of concern.
Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 8:49 pm
19 Jan 2008
Prior to W.'s exemption statement from the Persian Gulf, the NRDC were already boasting of Judge Florence-Marie Cooper's decision as a major victory. The NRDC have now brought suit against the president, but I wonder if they anticipated at all the president's action.
One of many aggravating details from the article:
<<
In a memo justifying his action, Bush did not address environmental concerns. He said his decision would "enable the Navy to train effectively" for activities "which are essential to national security" and "in the paramount interest of the United States."
>>
W. plainly does not understand what is truly in the interest of the US, and he should not be allowed to go unchallenged when he makes such statements.
Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 9:12 pm
19 Jan 2008
Such, more or less, from that reprehensible journalist, on the refusal to grant ESA listing to the Atlantic white marlin.
Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 9:37 pm
19 Jan 2008
Did the two "young bucks" (as BioD might call them) from Sea Shepherd really throw acid? Did the Japanese crew bind them with ropes? Those things almost do not matter; neither side can be believed. All we know is that the uninvited boarding took place, and that the Japanese sweetly deposited the guys into the hands of the Australians. So, the Japanese come out of this looking much better than they ought to.
This is such a huge, unfortunate distraction from the underlying evil: whales do not deserve to be hunted and slaughtered; and this whaling ought not to be allowed to continue.
Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
bookerly Posted 9:48 pm
19 Jan 2008
My Dear CanisCandida,
I know how you feel. Sometimes it feels like ten steps backwards and three steps sideways. The ocean news is almost all bad. Frankly, it was why I gave up eating fish. I saw no way to justify my doing so with what was coming.
Hang in there, and fight on!!!
patrick in Beijing
Permalink
Blueplanet Posted 10:00 pm
19 Jan 2008
The media coverage has been full of praise for these actions, and although the Japanese acted with restraint, they are still seen as the 'provocateurs' in this.
I'm afraid there will not be much interest in whaling for the mainstream media if the ships of conservation groups just follow the whaling fleet like some cold war Russian trawler.
Permalink
Tasermons Partner Posted 2:15 am
20 Jan 2008
I know, 3 days out of an entire hunt season may not seem like much. But to those few whales who just so happened to pass by at the right time, it meant everything.
Permalink
Sam Wells Posted 3:10 am
20 Jan 2008
The recreational take remains fairly constant but a new trend in fishing tournaments is "catch and release only" for any billfish. In the old days, a fish had to be presented at the marina weigh-station in order to count. Now they have judges, photographs, measuring tapes, and lie detectors. About the only time a fish is lost in this manner is if a large shark takes a bite out of it, which is rare.
Knowing such facts and stock assessments might not change your opinions but let's be honest here: NOAA did the right thing. /sammie
Onward through the fog
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 6:18 am
20 Jan 2008
Nevertheless, Blueplanet and Tasermons Partner, I acknowledge after all that this "hostage situation" may have worked out well for the Sea Shepherd people. It is very very hard to get reliable, complete and unbiased information from any of the parties: Sea Shepherd, Greenpeace, the Japanese whalers, the Australian coast guard, and, not least important, the journalists, who are like so many blind men studying an elephant.
But the Sea Shepherd people -- maybe Paul Watson himself? -- were brilliant, from the start, to name their ship, which set forth from Melbourne, after the late Steve Irwin. And now, the hostage story seems to be turning out in their favor, since the original confrontation is being described more and more as a kind of embassy of peace, and the Japanese-added detail about the two emissaries throwing acid has been dropped.
Still, Blueplanet, I am not sure there would be no publicity if there were no Sea Shepherd. On board Greenpeace's Esperanza is a three-man German documentary crew, as well as the BBC's (ironically named) Jonah Fisher, who sends a daily report for the TV news, and blogs when the mood hits him:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7171409.stm
It is not unreasonable to doubt Jonah's perfect objectivity. For one thing, he happens to be a rather charming young fellow, and no doubt the Esperanza people are finding it no trouble at all to have him embedded with them. Why, an old Russian seadog in the crew, named Viktor, who used to service Soviet submarines, gave Jonah a carving of a whale that he had done himself, as part of a "secret Santa" gift exchange for Christmas -- which strikes me as very sweet ...
Anyway, whether Jonah is truly on the journalistic up-and-up, he certainly seems to be reliably distributing information favorable to Greenpeace, which is definitely a good thing, in the manner of Fray Bartolome' de las Casas.
One bit of intrigue that he reports (without investigating deeply) sounds like something from an opera: Paul Watson contacted the Greenpeace mission leader, demanding to know the position of the Japanese fleet (the Esperanza having had the good luck to locate them pretty early on); Greenpeace refused, sticking to the policy of not cooperating in any way with the non-non-violent Sea Shepherd gang; Watson cursed them, declaring them to be guilty of any whale deaths (the great basso aria "A te la colpa, a te l'oltraggio!"); but he did learn the position soon thereafter, having been tipped off presumably by his secret inside operatives well placed in the Greenpeace organization. Sweet!
Tasermons Partner,
you are right that Sea Shepherd's successful distraction of the Japanese, as a result of their "embassy of peace," was on balance a very good thing, inasmuch as whale lives were saved.
But the Greenpeace gang claim that their tailing the Nisshin Maru was accomplishing the same thing. And surely they would protest Blueplanet's characterization of their tactics as ineffective intelligence-gathering, in the style of US-vs.-USSR high-seas espionage.
To that, the best response that anyone from the Sea Shepherd side could make is that the only reason the Esperanza is at all effective is because the Japanese are afraid the Greenpeace gang will at any moment start acting like the Sea Shepherd gang. Well, that is not impossible, but I doubt it. And anyway we certainly do not have enough relevant information.
Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
Sam Wells Posted 11:42 am
20 Jan 2008
Both Greenpeace and Sea Shepard have violated international piracy laws so many times it is not funny. Folks, this isn't chaining yourself to a tree, it includes acts such as ramming huge ships and attempting to board them. What's next, Boghammer boats with missiles on them?
Sea Shepard goes completely off the top, and throws nets and ropes into the water to foul their quarry's propeller, and even equipped their ship you like so much with a battering ram to attempt to sink their opponent. They're sick, and you're sick if you like it. /sammie
Onward through the fog
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 7:19 pm
20 Jan 2008
the lesser matter in what you wrote is that you seem to think I approve of the tactics of the Sea Shepherd gang. If you read what I wrote carefully, you would see that I side with the professed conscientious non-violence of Greenpeace; and I do not "like" the Sea Shepherd vessel, the M.V. Steve Irwin, or at least I have no special reason to, I only think its name is well chosen for good PR. I know nothing about the Steve Irwin's having been equipped with a ram, or ramming device, nor would I approve if that is the case.
(Would the late Steve Irwin have approved? I hope not. Where he is now, we can be assured he is praying for the good of one and all, especially for the good of the vulnerable, basically helpless living creatures whom he loved so much.)
The more important matter is your charge of piracy. I do not quite know what "piracy" means, as defined in maritime law; but I believe you, that both Sea Shepherd and Greenpeace are guilty of violating one or another law under the heading of "piracy."
The Sea Shepherd gang seem to have been trying to clog the propellers of at least one of the Japanese whaling vessels with ropes. Had they succeeded, that might have so bent the propeller shaft as to cause a leakage, which would be a very big ethical issue. It is much less significant, however, if all that might have been foreseen was to stop the propeller, leaving the ship securely afloat, with friendly vessels nearby.
The Greenpeace gang by contrast NEVER attempted anything like that. Nor did they ever try to ram any of the whaling vessels. Last year, there was a collision between one of the whaling vessels and one of the Greenpeace vessels (they had two then; this year they are down to just the Esperanza), which was reported by the Japanese to have been a ramming by the Greenpeace vessel. The Greenpeace gang have denied that charge strongly, and the captain and crew have given a very credible alternative explanation, putting the blame for the collision on the whaling vessel's reckless, or mischievous, navigation. The Greenpeace vessel is reported to have been more seriously damaged in that incident than was the whaling vessel.
Now, some ethical considerations on whether laws concerning "piracy" matter:
"Violence," e.g. against the owner, etc., of property, such as property floating on the ocean, must be distinguished from "violation of property rights," e.g. touching or otherwise affecting that floating property in an unfriendly way.
In ethical matters, property rights are trumped by many other considerations.
The safety and well-being of sentient living creatures trump property rights.
An ethically enlightened principle recently adopted by the United Nations is the "responsibility to protect." (See the Sunday New York Times, 1/20/08.)
In the 1986 movie "Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home," James T. Kirk positions a cloaked Klingon warbird between a Norwegian (?) whaling vessel and the pair of humpback whales whom he and the other good guys have befriended. A harpoon shot by the whalers bounces harmlessly off the side of the warbird. Then the warbird decloaks, and the whalers reverse course in panic. The audience is terrificly gladdened and relieved, plainly believing that that is the ideal thing to do to whalers.
In the Gospel According to Saint Matthew (aka "the Book of Matthew," in the style of the low-church Protestants), in chapter 26, verse 52, in the context of the arrest of Jesus on the evening of Holy Thursday in Gethsemane, during which one of Jesus' disciples strikes out with a sword to defend him, we read: "Then said Jesus unto him, 'Put again thy sword unto his place; for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.'" Modernly, "They that live by the sword shall die by the sword." "From which we learn," as the rabbis say, that, e.g., if you are in a line of work that involves committing acts of violence, do not be surprised if acts of violence are committed against you in response.
Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 7:29 pm
20 Jan 2008
Another instance of poor journalism. We need to know:
What exactly was the cause of death?
If this multiple fatality was new and uninstanced, what did the "Ocean Beauty" people do that had never been done before?
Who came to the aid of the surviving eagles? What kinds of therapeutic methods did they employ?
Have the recovered eagles been released?
What in the world is "fish slime"?
Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 8:26 pm
20 Jan 2008
Is it true that all of Ocean City is supportive of the marlin-catching contest?
Why do conservationists believe that Atlantic white marlin should be "listed"? Why exactly was their recommendation rejected?
What do promoters of animal welfare have to say about the fishing contest? Have they made clear to the people of Ocean City, and to their visitors, that fish are close cousins of ours, and that there is no "humane" way to kill a fish?
Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
Blueplanet Posted 11:26 pm
20 Jan 2008
Yes I know of the TV crews on Esperanza, the same ones who had to start their broadcasts off 'I'm on the Greenpeace ship......' and then spend the whole time talking about SS.
My only concern is that GP might be becoming a little too corporate, the Big Green to IBM's Big Blue, if you get my drift. I would like to see them taking a few more risks and being more creative, it is after all what they became famous for.
Permalink
Sam Wells Posted 2:42 am
21 Jan 2008
"Maritime piracy, according to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) of 1982, consists of any criminal acts of violence, detention, or depredation committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or aircraft that is directed on the high seas against another ship, aircraft, or against persons or property on board a ship or aircraft. Piracy can also be committed against a ship, aircraft, persons, or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any state."
Nothing about ethics there, although I see why some folks would rely on it, now knowing the Law of the Sea (LOS). Would robbing a bank to pay for your wife's cancer treatments be "ethical"? I think not.
Further, we have a situation of two wrongs. Sea Shepard claims that Japan is violating international law by hunting whales (actually, international laws allow Japan a "research quota"). This perceived violation thus would justify yet another criminal act such as piracy on the High Seas. Or does it? I'm not a philosopher but it sounds crazy to me.
Finally, let's make a point about simply "swarming" another boat, a tactic both GP and SS use. A recent case of swarming boats in the Straits of Hormuz (attacking a US Frigate) almost lead to outright war with Iraq. The only difference was the fact that those swarming boats were operated by revolutionary arm of the Iraqi government, which does not meet the definition of piracy. /sam
Onward through the fog
Permalink
Sam Wells Posted 3:04 am
21 Jan 2008
Onward through the fog
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 4:38 am
21 Jan 2008
Theft that is carried out to remedy some effect of poverty is usually illegal and punishable. But it is not considered a grave ethical offense; in some circumstances, it may even be justified, indeed noble. Robin Hood is traditionally admired as a hero.
A bank robbery carried out by a husband who has no money to pay for his wife's expensive medical treatment is a crime, and he is liable to arrest and punishment. But probably the circumstances of his wife's sickness and the family's poverty would be held to be mitigating, and the sentence would be accordingly less severe than it would be in other circumstances. Also, the fact that the husband feels the need to take that extreme recourse in order to preserve his wife's health can be interpreted as a serious indictment of an unjust society; society can be said to be complicit in the crime.
Do the Sea Shepherd gang charge the Japanese whalers with breaking a law? Even if the whalers were doing something illegal, the Sea Shepherd gang are acting like vigilantes by taking the enforcement of the law into their own hands, and that too is illegal.
So, I do not join them in asserting that the Japanese (and presumably the Icelanders and Norwegians as well) are breaking an international law regarding whale conservation. It seems that they are definitely violating the spirit of the international agreement; but their interpretation of the letter is probably arguable.
As for "swarming," it is possible that that term characterizes well enough what the Sea Shepherd gang do in their small boats; but from what I understand, it does not characterize the Greenpeace gang's tactics. The intentions of the Greenpeace boats, to interpose themselves between the harpoon cannons and the whales, are well known to the whalers. Therefore they cannot be said to resemble whatever the Iranian Revolutionary Guard vessels were up to.
Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
Sam Wells Posted 7:07 am
21 Jan 2008
As to your example of the Revolutionary days starting in the 1770's, I do believe there was a Declaration of Independence and that a small U.S. navy was put together. Horrible track record but a few good naval battles if you want to read up on it. Fascinating stuff.
Deviousness? We Americans excel at it. Back in the the 1770's the American schooners and small ships (none half the size of a British ship of the line) would fly the British Flag, thus saying it was compliant and ready for inspection. At the last minute the American boat would turn around the back of the boat, run up Old Glory, and shoot cannons through the stern captain's windows while disabling the rudder at the same time. Very effective and quite deadly.
But there again we were at war. Last I checked we were not at war with any whale killing nations and it was just a bunch of pirates taking matters into their own hands ...
-sammie
Onward through the fog
Permalink
odograph Posted 7:27 am
21 Jan 2008
Some thanks for the rescue, eh?
Actually it's an amazing story of survival after that. You'll never look at a dog the same way again. They landed in the Falklands, armed perhaps with knives, and without the dog's help hunting seals they certainly would have died.
Excellent book.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 9:53 am
23 Jan 2008
<<
For eleven days, we've been chasing the Japanese whaling factory ship Nisshin Maru through Antarctic waters. Every day they've spent trying to outrun us has been a safe day for whales. In fact, we estimate that by shutting down the whaling operations, we've saved as many as 82 whales through our efforts.
But today, the Nisshin Maru engaged in a different type of illegal activity, and we were there to stop it. It attempted to refuel in Antarctic Treaty waters. The Panamanian flagged ship Oriental Bluebird arrived on the scene, in an effort to refuel the fleet and take on packaged whale meat, processed in the weeks before we located the fleet. Refueling in the Antarctic is dangerous and a serious threat to the Antarctic environment which is recognized internationally as a specially protected area.
We immediately launched our inflatable boats, including mine. We steered a course between the Nisshin Maru and Oriental Bluebird. The Esperanza warned the vessels of our presence, but they continued to maneuver together, essentially trapping us between the two huge ships.
Two of the Japanese hunting ships were also on the scene, harassing our activists for more than an hour by performing close-quarter maneuvers near our boats, as we documented the exchange of whale meat and fuel between the Nisshin Maru and Oriental Bluebird.
Our boats are less than 26 feet in length, but we managed to keep the Goliath whaling ships apart long enough for another ship to appear on the horizon: Australia's Oceanic Viking. Now the Australian government is on the scene and documenting the Japanese whaling fleet's illegal activities for themselves.
Help us take the fight to save the whales off the water and into the political arena. It's time for President Bush to demand that Japanese Prime Minister Fukuda immediately abandon this whaling operation.
It has been an intense experience here in the waters of Antarctica, but another real battle will be fought by you, and we are counting on your help to apply political pressure where it counts most - right at home.
Sincerely,
Heath Hanson
Boat Driver
>>
Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
Tasermons Partner Posted 11:31 am
23 Jan 2008
This was good...but then...
as we documented the exchange of whale meat and fuel between the Nisshin Maru and Oriental Bluebird.
Not to criticize their efforts, but how exactly was that stoppin' 'em? If the exchange of meat and fuel went ahead anyway, I wouldn't consider that as a success, other than the documentation of the activities.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 6:46 pm
23 Jan 2008
Presumably the Greenpeace gang there on the Esperanza need to interpret such little-seeming accomplishments as real victories, in part for the sake of their own morale, in part to encourage the international support, such as it is, from little stay-at-home well-wishers like me.
Notice also Hanson's claim in the first paragraph that so far "we have saved as many as 82 whales." Of course, that is by their own estimation, which we are in no position to verify. And I am sure not even they can claim that none of those 82 whales was killed by the whalers on subsequent occasions.
Still, I am glad that Greenpeace is engaged in this sort of activity, documenting the whale slaughter, drawing international attention to it, and presenting it as villainous and cruel -- always remembering that actually stopping it will take a lot more time, during which many whales will die.
By the way, Hanson says that refueling in Antarctic waters is "dangerous," presumably because an oil spill would be environmentally destructive. And yet, we might suspect that the actions of his Greenpeace boats significantly increased the danger of a spill on this occasion.
Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 9:24 pm
23 Jan 2008
this collection of memoirs of early 19th-century maritime adventure, edited by Captain Elliot Snow, sounds fascinating. Too bad the single grumpy reviewer gave it only two stars.
Presumably the story to which you refer is that of
Charles H. Barnard, of New York (I shall have to check and see if he is an ancestor or relative of the eponymous founder of Barnard College, in the library of which my husband works, and where I lived and took courses many a long year ago). That took place during the War of 1812; and I do not know if at that time the United Kingdom still though of us Americans as a verminous pack of outlaws -- in which case they might barely justify their ill treatment of Barnard and his crew -- , or if they recognized the US as a fully sovereign state. Certainly the British terrorist activities at Washington, DC, might suggest the former.
It sounds to me like a potentially interesting opera by Gaetano Donizetti, perhaps entitled "Filomena delle Falklands," somewhat along these lines:
Act 1, Scene 1: a storm at sea, in the South Atlantic. The British captain, Riccardo Willingham (baritone), and his crew and passengers, including Lord Gualtiero Beckley, conte di Norwich (bass) and his beautiful daughter Filomena (soprano), are in life boats expecting to die, but are at last rescued by the brave American whaling captain, Carlo Barnard (baritone).
The passengers are brought on board by the American first mate, Ruggiero Van Pelt (tenor). He is overjoyed to see Filomena, whom he had known the previous year when he was studying in Oxford, and she is equally overjoyed to see him (duet: "Ah bei torri ed alberi dorati d'Oxford!"). He introduces her to his faithful dog, Caccialupo.
This is not unobserved by Filomena's father Gualtiero, or by Riccardo. They are displeased by the clear affection between the young lovers, for Gualtiero has betrothed Filomena to Riccardo. Privately Gualtiero berates her ("L'onore britanno tu dei sostener") while she protests ("L'onore non posso cosi` sostener").
Scene 2: Carlo's cabin. He has invited Gualtiero and Riccardo to dinner. They drink toasts to their friendship. Carlo says there is no reason why they should not be friends, just because their countries are at war. Riccardo says he does not understand, he has been long away from port. Carlo explains that indeed war has broken out between Britain and the US.
Riccardo withdraws to a corner apart. His mind rages, as he considers the requirements of his duty to the Crown, and the insult he has suffered because of an American rival. He vows to punish all the Americans, and rejoices that his revenge will take place in the same waters where the true love of his life, Elisabetta, was unfairly swept overboard during a storm at sea. Looking out the window onto the sea, he seems to see a company of cruel sea-goddesses, the same ones whom he had seen the night his beloved was taken from him; he calls on them to help him punish the Americans, for he has already given them an awful sacrifice ("Accepiste gia` da me un don crudel"). But through the darkness suddenly shines a great light, an apparition of Elisabetta, who bids him be peaceful, saying she loved him for being a man of peace ("Uom pacifico amai"); she tells him she is still alive, and that he must look for her; she will send him word somehow, even if it be by the mouth of a mute beast. He weeps, and promises not to take up the sword; but then, as he sees her vanish, he feels he has been deceived, curses the sea-goddesses for tricking him with a false vision ("Voi furie villane del barbaro mar"). With rage renewed, he repeats his vow to do away with the Americans. Then he falls in a faint.
Scene 3: the following morning; on the poopdeck. Filomena and Ruggiero are happily professing their undying love to one another, when a great commotion is heard. The British crew have seized control of the ship! Riccardo and two of his men rush in holding cutlasses, and arrest Ruggiero. Filomena cries out for her father, who enters with the bound Carlo, holding a pistol in his back. Riccardo announces that all the Americans will now be made to walk the plank. Carlo protests, and demands that they at least be set adrift in the boats. Ruggiero cries to Filomena that no sooner has he found her again than she is snatched from his eyes like a dream ("Come un sogno dagli occhi rapita"); he consoles her that however cruel the faithless British have been, at least he will have his dog for companionship ("Compagnia fedel di brutto almen avro`"). As the Americans are led away, Filomena swoons, and the curtain falls.
(Intermission)
Act 2, scene 1: some time later; the shore of the Falkland Islands.
The Americans mourn their hard situation as they lie about the beach in misery ("O dura spiaggia di lagrime e dolor"). Carlo cries out pitifully for the devastation that awaits his country at the hands of the barbarous British. Ruggiero laments his cruel fate at being separated from Filomena. But he consoles the crew that at least the dog Caccialupo has been finding them food. And yet he does not understand the meaning of the gold necklace and locket that the dog has been given to wear; in the locket is the message "I, Elizabeth, await you" ("Qual mano quest'oro, cagnuccio, ti da?"). The crew say that the stranger who gave the dog the necklace might be the mysterious woman whom they have seen at a distance on the misty shore.
Suddenly, a ship is sighted -- their own! -- , still flying the British flag. Gualtiero comes ashore, and mournfully tells the Americans that he was forced to look for them by his daughter. She was made to marry Riccardo, he explains, but tried to murder him on their wedding night; and the violence and the shock have made her go mad. In hopes of restoring her sanity, he has brought her to look for Ruggiero. She comes ashore in a blood-stained bridal gown, wearing a wreath of seaweed; she is mad, and seems to think she must throw herself into the sea. Ruggiero laments that he cannot bear to see her this way. He goes to her to comfort her, and slowly she comes to her senses, and rejoices to find herself again in Ruggiero's arms.
The bed carrying the wounded Riccardo is brought ashore. He says that he repents all the cruel things he has done to the Americans, and to Filomena. He forgives her for wounding him, and now he wishes to die in peace ("Finalmente in pace questi occhi chiudero'").
But just then he notices the locket around the dog's neck. He asks to see it; he recognizes it to be the one he gave Elisabetta. He rises, encouraged that his beloved may still be alive, and not far.
Just then, the dog, who ran off, returns, leading a veiled woman. She says that she is an English noblewoman, sadly shipwrecked on that shore, but strengthened to survive by the hope of seeing again her beloved. Gualtiero asks her her name, and she says "Elisabetta," as she raises her veil. Riccardo, seeing her, cries out, and she runs to him. They pray they will never be separated again; the entire company celebrates the strange workings of love, which can overcome misfortune ("Anche dei fati crudeli rettor").
Curtain.
Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
suzannah Posted 1:05 am
24 Jan 2008
Oceana: Protecting the world's oceans.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 7:18 am
24 Jan 2008
The most interesting story that is going on, I suspect, is what is going on within Japanese society. I do not see how a very profound and uplifting story can be told just yet about any of the Europeans, Australians and North Americans involved in Greenpeace and Sea Shepherd -- well, I mean, sure, their stories are impressive enough, lots of the characters are very heroic and/or charming, no doubt there is lots of romance of many kinds, but that only takes us to a certain level, story-wise. What we really want to be observing, though, story-wise and people-wise, is what is going on in Japan, among Japanese.
And on that note, Greenpeace earlier today sent around an appeal to write a letter to the CEO of Canon, who I think is right now the head of some Japanese business board, requesting him to put an end to Japanese whaling. The formula subject line was something like, "shoot whales with Canon cameras, not harpoons!"
Also: I was delighted, but also horrified, to discover this afternoon, that right here in NYC, on the walls of the 41st Street tunnel that passes between the north and south sections of the Port Authority Bus Terminal, there are life-sized illustrations of a large number of cetaceans, including humpback whales. I say "horrified" because I had never known those whale murals were there, but that is clearly something I should have known about. I definitely shall go back, when the weather is pleasanter, and observe them all at leisure.
Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
suzannah Posted 12:05 am
25 Jan 2008
Very, very true. Personally I feel like it's something of a failure on the part of western conservationists that we don't do more outreach to the Japanese people themselves. WHY do they whalehunt? WHY do they eat sharkfin soup? WHY do they continue to pay more and more for bluefin tuna?
It takes public pressure, in addition to policy work and guerilla advocacy tactics (like those of SS), to effect change. I feel like we don't understand Japanese society, and that handicaps us.
Oceana: Protecting the world's oceans.
Permalink
bookerly Posted 5:51 pm
29 Jan 2008
Suzannah, I could not agree with you more!!
To effect change, we must first understand.
Great Post!!!
patrick in Beijing
Permalink