Category Archives: High Seas

"The stakes are high and this wetsuit is our reality unless we act now," said Surfrider's Marketing Director, Eddie Anaya. "Our waterways are being polluted with toxic sewage, runoff and plastics. Sea levels are rising and threatening our beaches. The Rising Seas wetsuit concept is a stark glimpse into what every surfer and coastal enthusiast faces if we don't take immediate action to address climate change impacts and pollution. Together with Vissla, we're calling on everyone who cares about the ocean and coasts to let their voices be heard and demand action from elected officials to protect our ocean, waves and beaches for the future."

Clean water and healthy beaches are critical to the nation's coastal economies, communities, and recreation industries. In fact, coastal recreation and tourism constitute about 2.4 million jobs and contribute more than $124 billion to the U.S. economy every year. However, the ocean and coasts are increasingly at risk from plastic and water pollution, offshore oil drilling, ocean acidification and rising sea levels. Pollution at recreational beaches costs the U.S. economy more than $2.2 billion and results in 20,000 health advisories annually. Melting land ice and glaciers are causing sea levels to rise at an accelerated rate, altering ocean circulation and changing the ocean's chemistry.

"The Rising Seas Wetsuit project is a sobering reality check that we all have to engage in and take a stand to reverse the environmental decline of our oceans, waves and beaches," said Vissla's CEO, Paul Naude. "The thought that we may need this conceptual wetsuit in the future is frightening. We hope the message here stimulates a call to action for everyone to get actively involved in demanding that governments local, state and national take urgent steps to address the environmental issues at hand. We're asking everyone who cares about a healthy planet to help us to never have to produce this wetsuit."

The Surfrider Foundation and Vissla are calling on the public to make their voices heard and join Surfrider's virtual march on Washington, D.C. to urge federal leaders to take action on coastal protection issues. Signatures from Surfrider's action alertwill be sent immediately to congressional representatives and then hand-delivered to Congress by Surfrider and recreation industry representatives during the upcoming Coastal Recreation Hill Day.

The innovative Rising Seas concept was developed by veteran creative directors Scott Brown and Alex Kemp, owners of the underground surf shop Lone Wolfs Objets d'Surf. Alex's music company, Wolf at the Door, produced the video, soundtrack and SFX. Co-produced by Enich Harris.

To find out more, visit risingseas.vissla.comand take action now at Surfrider.org.

About the Surfrider Foundation

The Surfrider Foundation is a nonprofit grassroots organization dedicated to the protection and enjoyment of our world's ocean, waves and beaches through a powerful network. Founded in 1984 by a handful of visionary surfers in Malibu, California, the Surfrider Foundation now maintains more than a million supporters, activists and members, with over 170 volunteer-led chapters and student clubs in the U.S., and more than 600 victories protecting our coasts. Learn more at surfrider.org.

About Vissla

Vissla is a brand that represents creative freedom, a forward-thinking philosophy, and a generation of creators and innovators. They embrace the modern do-it-yourself attitude within surf culture, performance surfing & craftsmanship, and constantly strive to minimize their environmental impact to protect the oceans and waves that raised us.

SOURCE Surfrider Foundation

http://www.surfrider.org

Read the original here:

The Seas Are Rising and So Are We: Vissla and Surfrider Debut a Wetsuit They Never Want to Make a Reality to Turn the Tide Against Climate Change -...

Key point:The Navy's experience was gained with blood, but it would help again against the Nazis during the Second Battle of the Atlantic.

When Congress voted on April 6, 1917 to declare war on Imperial Germany, the task before the U.S. Navy was clear: it needed to transport and supply over a million men across the Atlantic despite the Imperial German Navys ferocious U-Boat campaign, which reached its peak that month, sinking over 874,000 tons of shipping.

Indeed, Germanys decision to recommence unrestricted submarine warfare in February was one of the decisive factors driving the United States, and later Brazil, into finally joining the war to end all wars.

While World War I submarines could only remain submerged for brief periods, they were highly successful at picking off unescorted merchants ship in the Atlantic and Mediterranean. Neither active sonar nor radar yet existed with which to track submarines, though the British had begun using hydrophones to listen for the noise of a submarines diesel engine.

The most successful anti-submarine ships were agile torpedo-boat destroyers, which sank U-Boats using deck guns and even ramming. Starting in 1916, Royal Navy vessels carried depth charge designed to detonate underwater, rupturing a submarines hull. These proved effective if the ship captains could guess the subs position. Statistically, naval mines proved deadliest, accounting for one-third of U-Boat losses.

For years, the Royal Navy resisted instituting a convoy system to guard merchant ships, preferring not to divert warships from offensive missions and believing the decrease in throughput from adhering to a convoy schedule would prove worse than the losses inflicted by U-Boats.

But that April, U-Boats had sunk one-quarter of all merchant ships bound for the UK, leaving it with just six weeks grain supply. Threatened with economic collapse, the Royal Navy finally instituted the convoy system. But the Brits had a problem: they could divert only forty-three out of the seventy-five destroyers required to escort convoys.

Naval liaison Rear Admiral William Sims convinced the navy to dispatch thirty-five U.S. destroyers to bases at Queenstown (modern-day Cobh), Ireland to fill in the gap. These began escorting convoys on May 24, usually supported by navy cruisers. In 1918, an even larger escort flotilla began operating out of Brest, France.

The U.S. Navy itself began the war with only fifty-one destroyers. It immediately faced a classic military procurement problem: politicians and admirals wanted to build more expensive battleships and battlecruisers, construction of sixteen of which had been authorized by the Naval Act of 1916.

But the Royal Navy already had the German High Seas fleet effectively bottled up in port with its larger force. While five coal-burning and three oil-burning U.S. battleships did join the blockade in 1918, they never saw action. Common sense prevailed, and battleship construction was halted in favor of building 266 destroyers.

More rapidly, the Navy commissioned hundreds of small 70-ton wooden-hulled sub-chasers equipped with hydrophones, 3 deck guns and depth charges. Civilian yachts were similarly converted. The Navys eleven L-class and K-class submarines were also deployed to Berehaven (now Castletownbere), Ireland and the Azores respectively to hunt (surfaced) U-Boats, but none encountered enemy forces during the war.

Hundreds of twin-engine HS maritime patrol planes were also procured to scour the seas for submarines. Though the seaplanes sank few if any submarines, they disrupted numerous attacks by forcing U-Boats to dive and abort their torpedo runs.

The convoy system proved a dramatic success, cutting shipping losses to less than half their peak. U-Boats simply lacked unprotected targets and were more likely to be lost combating escorts. Shipping losses gradually fell to roughly 300,000 tons per month, while U-Boat losses increased from three per month to between five and ten.

However, submariner-hunting remained a dangerous business in which a hunter could swiftly become hunted. On Nov. 17, 1917, the destroyer USS Cassin was pursuing U-61 near Ireland when the U-Boat counterattacked. Spotting a torpedo rushing towards the depth-charge launcher on the ships stern, Gunners Mate Osmond Ingram lunged forth to jettison the explosive charges but was caught in the blast that tore away the destroyers rudder. The Cassin remained afloat and shelled U-61s conning tower, causing her to disengage. Ingram was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor.

The destroyer Jacob Jones was not so fortunate when she was struck in the rudder by a torpedo fired by U-353 near Brest on December 6. Sixty-six crew perished abandoning ship as her depth charges detonated. Gallantly, U-Boat captain Karl Rose rescued two of the crew and radioed the position of the other survivors.

U.S. sub-hunters did score some successes. On November 17, the destroyers Fanning and Nicholson forced U-58 to the surface with depth charges, then engaged her with deck guns until her crew scuttled her. The converted yacht Christabel crippled a U-Boat with depth charges in May 1918 off the coast of Spain.

That month, the Imperial Navy began dispatching long-range U-Boat cruisers with huge 150-millimeter deck guns to maraud the U.S. coast. These sank ninety-three vessels, mostly small civilian fishing boats. The Germans hoped this would spread panic, causing the Americans to withdraw assets in Europe for home defense.

Notably, on July 18 the boat U-156 surfaced off the coastal town of Orleans on Cape Cod, Massachusetts, and proceeded to destroy a tugboat, four barges and the nearby shoreline with its cannons. Nine Coast Guard HS and Model R-9 seaplane bombers scrambled from NAS Chatham and peppered the withdrawing U-boat with bombsnone of which exploded.

The following day, the armored cruiser USS San Diego struck a mine probably lain by U-156 south of Long Island. The explosion flooded her engine room, causing the cruiser to sink with the loss of six handsbecoming the only capital ship lost by the navy. U-156 proceeded to sink twenty-one fishing boats in the Gulf of Maine, and even commandeered a trawler to assist in its rampage. But though the navy instituted coastal convoys, it didnt withdraw ships from Europe.

U-Boats were also active in the Mediterranean, and Gibraltar-based American subchasersoften little more than civilian yachts fitted with 3 guns and depth chargestwice clashed with them, sinking at least one.

Perhaps the Navys most swashbuckling episode of the war occurred on October 2, 1918, when twelve U.S. subchasers covered an Italian and British surface force raiding the Albanian port of Durazzo. Dodging shells from shore batteries, the subchasers cleared a path through the defensive minefield for the accompanying capital ships. They then hounded away the submarines U-29 and U-31, heavily damaging both.

The navys deadliest anti-submarine measure was the North Sea Mine Barrage, a 230-mile-long chain of 100,000 naval mines between the Orkney islands and Norway. U-Boats seeking passage to the Atlantic had to wend through eighteen rows of Mark 6 mines concealed at depths of twenty-four, forty-nine and seventy-three meters deep, strung together with piano wire. Each of the horned steel spheres contained three hundred pounds of TNT. The barrage cost $40 million ($722 million in 2018 dollars) and required the deployment of eight large steamships. However, it sank between four and eight U-Boatsincluding the infamous U-156and damaged another eight.

Ultimately, 178 out of 360 operational U-Boats were sunk during World War I. In return, the German subs sank 5,000 merchant ships totaling 12.8 million tons, killing 15,000 mariners. The U.S. Navy lost 431 personnel and five shipsits worst loss occurred when the collier USS Cyclops vanished with 306 crew in the Bermuda Triangle.

Despite its unglamorous duties, the U.S. Navy learned valuable lessons in the Great War about employing convoys, smaller submarine-hunters and maritime patrol planes that would save many lives in the even more destructive conflict that followed two decades later.

Sbastien Roblin holds a masters degree in conflict resolution from Georgetown University and served as a university instructor for the Peace Corps in China. He has also worked in education, editing, and refugee resettlement in France and the United States. He currently writes on security and military history for War Is Boring. This first appeared in December 2018.

See the rest here:

How America Learned How to Hunt and Kill Submarines (Thank World War I) - The National Interest Online

Cruise ship holidays come with plenty of positives thanks to friendly crew, onboard entertainment and the opportunity to explore new destinations. That said, such trips can still come with their own share of negatives for certain travellers. Seasickness is an unpleasant side effect of taking to the water and it can be very nasty for some suffers. According to the NHS: Motion sickness is caused by repeated movements when travelling, like going over bumps in a car or moving up and down in a boat.

The inner ear sends different signals to your brain from those your eyes are seeing. These confusing messages cause you to feel unwell.

A new cruise ship launching this month boasts a feature which could prevent passengers suffering from seasickness.

Cruise line Aurora Expeditions will see the Greg Mortimer cruise ship set sail this October.

Instead of featuring the conventional bulbous bow seen on regular cruise ships, this vessel has something quite different.

The 80-cabin Greg Mortimer is the first expedition ship to incorporate the patented Ulstein X-Bow.

The X-Bow - which rather resembles the nose of a Concorde - is a true game changer for the industry, according to Aurora Expeditions.

Instead of the traditional bow shape and design that punches through the water, the Ulstein X-Bow hull is curved in a novel shape which increases the foreship volume, explains the cruise companys website.

As a result, the bow penetrates the waves in a way where the water gently flows over the bow reducing impact and slamming loads.

This results in the following benefits on board the ship: reduced bow impact and slamming loads, reduced wave-induced vibrations, lower acceleration levels, lower pitch response due to volume and lower speedloss.

Aurora Expeditions explains: The main advantage of the Ulstein X-Bow is that it can pierce waves with more stability than a traditional ship bow.

Instead of simply rising on the waves and then dropping with tremendous force, the X-Bow is able to absorb the force more consistency across its surface enabling the ship to remain more stable during poor weather conditions, increasing comfort for passengers and crew alike.

However, if the new ship is not for you there are other ways you help fightseasickness when on a cruise.

The NHS advises: Minimise motion sit in the middle of a boat, look straight ahead at a fixed point, such as the horizon and breathe fresh air if possible.

The health body also advises closing your eyes and breathing slowly while focusing on your breathing as well as eating ginger, be it as a tablet, biscuit or tea.

An unlikely location onboard a cruise ship which could be helpful to head to if nausea sets in is the casino.

According to cruise ship doctor Ben MacFarlanes book Cruise Ship SOS: They dont want to compromise the roulette ball. Nor do they want any seasick passengers heading back to their cabins and interrupting a losing streak.

If you know you're susceptible to seasickness on a cruise it's well worth making sure you choose the right ship cabin for you.

Ex cruise ship crew member Joshua Kinser recommends avoiding the cabins in the middle and opting for lower decks instead.

Lower decks will not have as much rocking and motion when in high seas, he told Express.co.uk. So if youre concerned about seasickness these are good choices.

See original here:

Cruises: New cruise ship could help beat seasickness with this clever feature - Express

ONTARIO Putting on a live performance is a challenge for even the most seasoned of directors, but taking on the classic works of Gilbert and Sullivan provides an extra layer of challenge. Tackling a project of this magnitude is what Sterling Blackwell is excited to be doing. Blackwell, along with Jan Davis, adapted this latest incarnation of the classic tale. The Argus caught up with him for a question-and-answer session as he gears up to direct three upcoming performances of The Pirates of Penzance at Four Rivers Cultural Center this Thursday through Saturday.

At the end of every performance, audience members will have the opportunity to donate to local domestic violence outreach organization, Project DOVE. Cast members will take up donations while interacting with the audience.

Answers are running unchanged, as submitted.

Argus: When did you first know you were drawn to the arts and performing?

Blackwell: The arts have ALWAYS been a part of my life in one form or another. I have always loved to sing, paint, create things... I find it all very therapeutic and rejuvenating for the soul. Growing up I watched my mother perform in live productions and on TV commercials and such in Texas. Though I never thought much of it, other than I loved to watch her, it wasnt until I myself got into middle school and took a drama class that I fell in love with getting to perform on stage.

Argus: What are some challenges in directing a show like Pirates of Penzance?

Blackwell: Well... Pirates of Penzance is technically an Operetta. There is VERY little dialogue in the show and almost everything is sung. Last I checked, we dont have an opera company in Ontario and even though we have some amazing talent, not everyone is going to want to come and see an operetta by a community theater. I needed a show that I knew would be low on cost, have the flexibility to make changes to the script, and would still be fun for the audiences to come watch. Pirates was the answer. I have more ladies than men in the show, so I got creative on how I adjusted the dialogue in the performance. There are a few Pirate Step-Sisters, Man pirates doubling as policeman, and even some puppets thrown in the mix. Ive changed some lines, added a new song rewritten by my friend Jan Davis, and tried to give the play a little more life while keeping much of the same music and spirit of the original. Also, because I was so short on guys, there is an opportunity for some audience members to join us each night for the performance! That in itself makes for some fun and exciting challenges.

Argus: How have your perspectives on directing changed since taking on this project?

Blackwell: Ive been directing for nearly 15 years in the Treasure Valley and every show changes me in some way. I am so honored to have a cast that has sacrificed so much of their time to be in this production. We laugh a lot, sometimes through tears, but we absolutely become a family through the rehearsal process. How can your perspective NOT change when you are surrounded by new people who become a part of your pirate family? I may be a teacher of 170+ students, but I dont have kids at home. Anyone who has a family and still tries to enrich their lives by doing some arts is truly amazing to me and I look at the in awe and wonder. I can barely feed myself and rehearse, Im not sure how they can do it all! Total respect for them! Beyond the cast, I have a much deeper respect for Gilbert and Sullivan as artists and for any music director that says yes to any of their work! Its tough stuff!

Argus: Is there a different set of challenges associated with live performance as opposed to something that is filmed?

Blackwell: Live performance is a slow rehearsal process with a short lived moment of glory while on stage. It is a rewarding experience and you push your self to get that perfect performance in the end. Film on the other hand is a short rehearsal process that can lead to a much longer moment of glory if the film does well. Both are rewarding in their own ways, but I definitely feel there is a much stronger transformative power behind live performance than there is in film. On stage you dont have the luxury of cutting and trying the scene again. You have to move forward with the show even if you missed a line, forgot a prop, or fell on stage. The courage that comes from going on with the show despite your mistakes is so empowering that I wish EVERYONE would take a chance on performing live!

Argus: Is there a challenge in taking on work of Gilbert & Sullivan?

Blackwell: Yes... oh my goodness, YES! The music is grand, glorious, and often much more difficult for your actors if you plan on having them do anything other than just stand on stage and sing. We have some amazing talent, but I definitely had to transpose the songs a few keys so that it wasnt as strenuous on our voices and we could move while singing. If I do another Gilbert & Sullivan show, I will make sure I have enough money to hire a musical director so I dont have to wear that stressful hat as well!

Argus: Do you have any projects that youre working on in the future?

Blackwell: Always! Fruitland High Schools Musical Theater Class will be bringing Disneys NEWSIES to Four Rivers mid February of 2020. Keep your eyes peeled for that show because it is going to be amazing! (50 kids on stage tap dancing... yep- its gonna happen!) Once that show is done, I will be working on the next Re.Theater performance. Im not set on which show just yet, but I am hoping to have enough money from the ticket sales of Pirates to make it a bigger named show. Only time will tell.

Read this article:

Sailing the high seas with Sterling Blackwell: Director of upcoming 'Pirates of Penzance' performances takes time out for a Q-and-A - Ontario Argus...

On October 12, an unknown assailant attacked an Iranian oil tanker in the Red Sea. Photos from the Iranian government revealed gaping holes in the side of the Sabiti, which authorities believe were caused by a missile attack.

According to president Hassan Rouhani, the attack was carried out by a government, and not a terrorist group, though he did not specify which of Irans regional antagonists was responsible.

Oil prices jumped for a day before falling back again.

The attack is another in a string of incidents this year involving ocean-going oil tankers, nearly all of them involving Iran in one way or another, and each one shrouded in mystery. So far, the attacks have had little lasting effect on the oil market, though tanker rates have climbed considerably since 2018.

While measuring the total impact of the tit-for-tat exchanges has been difficult, the tanker attacks have been taken as a sign of rising Middle East tension related to the U.S. campaign of maximum pressure on the Islamic Republic of Iran.

A sustained campaign on tanker traffic could have immense consequences for the security of the energy shipping lanes

Yet while the immediate impact of these attacks has been relatively minor, a sustained campaign on tanker traffic could have immense consequences for the security of the energy shipping lanes.

The recent spate of violence echoes another chapter of historythe infamous Tanker War of the 1980s. Iran and Iraq, two OPEC members and major oil producers, were locked in a bitter, destructive war, one that would eventually claim over a million lives. Both states depended on oil revenues to fund the war effort (though Iraq had the benefit of drawing on loans from Arab states hostile to Irans new revolutionary government), and attacks on tankers and oil export facilities became a hallmark of the conflict.

According to the U.S. Naval Institute, Iraq attacked 280 vessels to Irans 168, threatening to bring all tanker traffic in the Persian Gulf to a halt and forcing a U.S. intervention through operations Earnest Will and Praying Mantis.

The Tanker War occurred amidst a global oil glut: despite the violence, crude prices fell throughout the 1980s. But the risk to the global oil trade, which depends on large, vulnerable super-tankers, was made eminently clear by the attacks in the Gulf, emphasizing the importance of choke points like the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway through which one-third of all globally-traded oil passes each day.

More recent attacks on global tanker traffic have helped to highlight such issues once again, though in a more opaque, less definable fashion.

In the 1980s, the Iran-Iraq tanker conflict triggered a U.S. military response, with American warships escorting neutral tankers through the Persian Gulf as military operations neutralized Irans naval capabilities.

But now, assailants deploy a variety of covers, including drones and regional proxies, to obscure intentions. Technology has made such attacks somewhat easier to carry out, while the regions labyrinthine politics obscures intentions and capabilities.

Two attacks on oil tankers in June 2019 were blamed on Iran, which has come under enormous pressure from renewed sanctions and an informal U.S.-orchestrated oil embargo. Irans oil exports have dropped from 2 million bpd to less than 200,000 bpd this year: thus, the attacks presumably could be a form of Iranian retribution. But Iranian culpability was never completely proven, and oil markets barely registered the violence.

A repeat occurred in September, when the Saudi oil processing facility at Abqaiq suffered a massive attack, cutting Saudi oil production in half. Markets responded with a sudden spike, then fell back down after Saudi reassurances that production would recover quickly.

The attack was widely blamed on Iran, but yet again, the evidence was inconclusive, while Irans Houthi allies claimed responsibility.

The October 12 attack on the Sabiti could have been a reprisal for AbqaiqIranian authorities initially blamed Saudi Arabia, before walking back their accusations.

Markets have been complacent, to say the least, in the face of such geopolitical risk. But it bears noting that falling prices characterized the 1980s Tanker War, when dozens of tankers were under attack every month. Oil fundamentalsover-supply, rising non-OPEC production, and Saudi spare capacitydrove down prices even as tankers fell under mine and missile attack in the Persian Gulf.

So far, there has been no indication that the United Statesstill the most powerful military presence in the Middle Eastwill get involved as it did in the 1980s, though there will be an expanded U.S. presence in Saudi Arabia, with eighteen-hundred American personnel and several fighter squadron dispatched to bolster Saudi defenses.

The Trump Administration remains committed to the maximum pressure campaign, but Iran has taken a back-seat to the deteriorating situation in northern Syria, to say nothing of the impeachment inquiry proceeding in Washington D.C. And with oil markets quiescent, there is little political pressure to act. The President has shown himself to be particularly sensitive to any developments which might cause a spike in oil pricesthus, if tensions on the high seas were to translate to pain at the gas pump, a response from the Trump Administration would be more forthcoming.

The attacks this year betray an uneasy realitythat the global energy infrastructure remains vulnerable to attack, particularly from rival regional powers like Saudi Arabia and Iran, and that such attacks can be conducted on a limited scale in opaque fashion, with a high level of uncertainty and an increasing risk of escalation.

So far, that escalation has not occurredthough the U.S. came within inches of attacking Iran directly in June 2019.

With regional tensions flaring up over northern Syria and the U.S. maximum pressure campaign against Iran showing no signs of abating, it is almost certain that the attacks will continuesooner or later, global energy markets are bound to react.

Follow this link:

A New Tanker War? Understanding Rising Violence on the High Seas - The Fuse - The Fuse

PANAMA CITY BEACH, Fla. (WMBB) The past several days pirates have been seen all over Panama City Beach as part of the Pirates of the High Seas Fest which Sunday night.

The festival had different events all weekend. There was live music throughout the whole weekend, everyone dressed in pirate costumes, and different vendors, as well as food trucks.

It was a family-friendly event as there were several different things for kids to enjoy. Festival goers and vendors say theyve had a blast and that this is an event that excites them every year.

the festival was a grand time, we were at pier park friday and saturday and now were at the grand lagoon having a good time. We had face painting, we had music, we had magicians, we had a water flotilla. We had a grant time.If you werent here you missed out, said Captain Pirate of the White Sands, Del Mcrea.

Festivities concluded at the Captain Andersons Marina with a firework show Sunday evening.

I think we had more people this year than we did last year, it was such a great time. People were just flowing, we still have people coming in to listen to music and watch fireworks, said Mcrea.

Next years pirates festival will take place during Columbus Day weekend.

Link:

Pirates of the High Seas Fest wraps up on Sunday - WMBB - mypanhandle.com

Jeremy Strong as Kendall Roy and Brian Cox as Logan Roy in the season finale of HBO's Succession. Graeme Hunter/HBO hide caption

Jeremy Strong as Kendall Roy and Brian Cox as Logan Roy in the season finale of HBO's Succession.

It is hopefully clear that a review and discussion of the Succession season two finale is not suitable for people who do not want to be spoiled regarding the Succession season two finale. If it is not clear: You will know what happened on this episode by the time you're finished reading this piece. Choose wisely.

We began this season of Succession with Kendall Roy half-submerged in what was supposed to be a relaxing spa soak but was more like a very wet metaphor. And he didn't get his head above water until the last 30 seconds of the second-season finale.

There were times when this season looked like it might be about Kendall's sister, Shiv (Sarah Snook) her father, Logan (Brian Cox), dangled the "top job" at the company, as he calls it, in front of her face, then refused to give it to her. Shiv's restlessness seemed like perhaps it was the biggest threat to Logan.

There were times when it seemed like it might be about Kendall smoothly transitioning into being his father's traumatized but functional right hand. After ending last season in the weakest possible position, needing to be rescued from the father he had been trying to overthrow, Kendall became unfailingly loyal. When he put on a good performance at the congressional hearings, it suggested we could be headed for a conclusion where Kendall finally became his father's favorite something he wants so desperately that it drips from Jeremy Strong's performance almost as much as sweat so often seems to.

But no. No, Logan decided it was time for a "blood sacrifice," as he put it someone who could be thrown to the wolves and blamed for the devastating revelations about Waystar Royco's cruise division. Someone who would satisfy the shareholders that the problem was being taken seriously; someone who would give those shareholders, as one told Logan on the phone, "cover." So Logan gathered the family and the top lieutenants Kendall, Shiv and Tom, Roman (Kieran Culkin), even Greg on the Roy yacht and watched each one try to respectfully, gently argue that the person sacrificed should emphatically not be them, no offense to whomever they suggested it should be.

The obvious answer was Tom (Matthew Macfadyen), Shiv's husband. He had been in charge of cruises; he had a logical connection to the crimes committed, even if they predated his leadership. After all, one of the things someone needed to take responsibility for was the cover-up, and Tom carried out key elements of the cover-up. He wouldn't even have been just a figurehead. Tom had the advantage of being both largely expendable to the family and actually guilty, not that they would care. Particularly if they threw in poor dopey cousin Greg, Tom's assistant, they thought maybe that would be enough.

Sarah Snook brought out Shiv's shocking shrug-it-off energy in the scene let's just call it the Roy Family Murder Breakfast in which she seemed to agree with the group that the blood sacrifice should be Tom. Her husband! Her own husband! Sure, why not? Tom was kinda like family, she explained, without actually being family. Which you can translate as "he's close enough for the shareholders to think it really means something for us to hand him over to be sacrificed, when in fact, eh."

But it was not to be Tom, because once he and Shiv were in private and he made clear how devastated he was by her betrayal and once that opened other wounds in their marriage to the point where he questioned its status as a going concern Shiv shifted gears. She went to her father and said it could not be Tom. By then, it appeared that it was likely to be either Tom or Kendall who would suffer, and Shiv took the coward's way out: She chose while refusing to choose, saying she couldn't make the decision ... but it couldn't be Tom. (The degree to which Shiv truly loves Tom has always been an intriguing element of their marriage. Her saving him is a data point, but so was her initially being prepared not to.)

And so Logan chose Kendall to be sacrificed, breaking the news gently or what passes for gently in a man whose idea of bedside manner would be leaving you one-third of your ice chips while you're in the hospital and he's at your bedside feeling thirsty. Kendall would have to make a statement that he had known about the misconduct in the cruise division, he had engineered the cover-up, he had done it all, and in Logan's words, it had gone "no higher." Kendall would sacrifice himself to save his father, and ultimately to save the company.

So when did Kendall decide ... not to? When did Kendall decide that instead of falling on his sword, he would stroll into that press conference, whip out a set of note cards and call his father "a malignant presence, a bully and a liar"? When did he decide that even knowing his father could ruin him with the story of the waiter who died after Kendall drove off a bridge, it was over? When did he decide that instead of reciting "I saw their plan; my dad's plan was better" over and over as he did in the first episode of this season, and instead of saying "my dad told me to" the way he did when he destroyed Vaulter, he would not only sacrifice his father as the mover behind the cruises debacle but reveal his father's deceitful, vicious personality?

My money is on the moment in which, referring to the death of the waiter, Logan repeated an abbreviation that came out of the cruise division, used when a migrant worker or a sex worker died on a ship: NRPI. No Real Person Involved. It is shorthand, really, for the idea that only some people matter.

Logan believes in NRPI. Roman believes in it. Shiv just NRPI'd her own husband until he specifically asked her not to. But Kendall is, perhaps ironically given the protection he accepted from his father, not an NRPI kind of person. He agonized over that accident. He hated himself for shutting down Vaulter an act he proved he could carry out in an NRPI-style manner, provided he didn't pay too much attention to feeling his skin go gray and clammy.

Kendall had already been reminded during the trip that his father doesn't care about his feelings: Logan had forced Kendall to send his girlfriend away in the middle of the trip, a fresh humiliation that increased Kendall's isolation. Things built up. Logan's callous conducting of the Family Murder Breakfast and his announcement that he needed a "skull to wave" showed Kendall how ready his father was to throw away his kids, not to mention faithful lieutenants like Gerri (J. Smith-Cameron), Karl (David Rasche) and Frank (Peter Friedman).

When Logan told Kendall that his was the skull that would be waved, a resigned Kendall asked him a question. Had Logan ever believed that Kendall could do the top job? After the profound cruelty of acting like he'd never really thought about it, Logan came around to an answer: "You're not a killer," he said. "You have to be a killer." Jeremy Strong's performance in this critical scene with Cox looks very different on second viewing. What originally played as agonized resignation to his situation and an understanding that he'd have to be the skull, as it were, looks now like agonized resignation to the fact that he will never have his father's love and approval this way. He'll never get there by trying to be good and loyal and perfect; that's what he was doing all season, and he's still the skull. This family only respects killers. Not the kind who accidentally cause the deaths of waiters, either. Only the kind who kill with ice-cold calculation.

So that's what Kendall did.

Because Kendall, after learning the bad news, wound up on a plane back home with Greg (Nicholas Braun). This was extraordinarily bad luck for Logan, who had no way of knowing Greg had first saved some of the troublesome records Tom told him to get rid of. He had no way of knowing that when Tom found out and insisted on burning what was left, Greg once again reserved a few in case he ever needed them. Greg spent this entire season being Chekhov's knucklehead, and ultimately, like all the things metaphorically rendered unto Chekhov, he mattered a great deal.

In order to preserve the suspense of the ending, in order to create the gasp when Kendall goes to the press conference and says "BUT" between what sounds like it will be an admission of guilt and what becomes a blast of accusations against his father, we didn't see what happened on the plane home. We saw Greg gently tell Kendall he felt bad that Kendall had to be the blood sacrifice. And we've seen a friendship growing between Greg and Kendall, the only family member who's ever shown the kid any kindness.

Presumably, at some point during that flight, they talked. Greg revealed that he was holding on to the evidence Kendall needed to make accusations against Logan stick. Or Kendall opened up about being unable to get his father's love. Or both. The key to Kendall's ability to finally carry out the fully public attack on his father that's been brewing since season one episode one, the key to Kendall's escape from his father's "protection" that's been brewing since season two episode one? It turned out to be Greg. Greg, who saved his secret papers in a folder labeled "SECRET."

This was a season that was enjoyable to watch as it proceeded but that looks far more impressive in light of the finale. It looked at times like they had flattened Kendall's affect too much; perhaps he was too much changed by the accident after Shiv's wedding, too devastated and defanged to maintain the powerful dynamic between himself and his father that drove the first season. The character of Rhea Jarrell never entirely jelled, despite the reliable presence of Holly Hunter. The strange sexual connection between Roman and Gerri was picked up and put down a little abruptly, although the notion that they share some sort of bond flared during the Family Murder Breakfast when Roman rose to her defense. Shiv's waffling about whether she was really prepared to do battle with her father spoiler alert: She was not makes more sense as a prelude to her weakness in the finale. It is Shiv, perhaps, who is not a killer.

And now, Kendall's dead eyes all season make narrative sense. The story was going here, to this place where the torment and the misery accumulated, to where Kendall was willing to blow up his family because it was better than all the other choices. Even the embarrassing tribute rap at Logan's party is now, in context, just one of the last gasps of his desperate attempt to earn his father's approval. Now, that rap is just more evidence that Kendall may have looked cold in the old peepers, but in fact he was doing everything he could think of. He played a relatively non-flashy role in the now-infamous "Boar on the Floor" sequence in the episode "Hunting," precisely because he was keeping out of as much of the drama as he could. In fact, his role in "Hunting" and at several other points during the season was to do his father's dirty work without complaint to inform, to obey, to expose. He was the good son.

The last bit of business to deal with is Logan's tiny hint of a smile as he watches his son accuse him of being a monster. Is he a little impressed that Kendall is more of a killer than he thought? Does he enjoy a fight? Did he somehow intend for this to happen, so that he himself would wind up being the skull and the company would live on? (That last theory was raised with me by a reader on Twitter, and I must say: I hadn't thought of it, but I don't think Logan would gamble that hard with his company.)

My vote is for some combination of all of it. Logan doesn't mind a fight, and he hates weakness even more than aggressive attack. Some part of him only respects people who come for him. That's not to say he won't attempt to crush them like bugs as I can only assume he will do with Kendall.

There are so many lessons to take away from this episode: It is futile to seek an immoral person's approval if you're not prepared to be immoral yourself. Even if your husband is a goober, you're going to feel bad if you offer to let your father destroy him. When you burn a clutch of secret papers, make sure you see them all go. Don't alienate the tall oddball; you never know what secrets he may be hiding.

And finally: If someone writes you a rap, at least try to look grateful.

More:

Review: 'Succession' Ends Season 2 On The High (And Low) Seas - NPR

Credit: Compass Rose Press

Above: The cover of the new book "Moana" by San Diego boat builder and author Lew Maurer.

A boat builder was approached to build a custom catamaran for a wealthy Belgian man and his family and it turned into a 15-plus-year adventure that spans 118,000 miles to some of the remotest places on the planet.

Aired: October 14, 2019 | Transcript

In 1998, San Diego boat builder, Lew Maurer, got a very special commission. A wealthy Belgian businessman retained Maurer to build a unique luxury catamaran. The 80-foot vessel was designed to carry the Belgian father and his young family on trips around the world to some of the remotest places on earth.

The boat, called Moana, launched in 2000. Maurer has just written a book about the Moana and the adventures of the family and crew who sailed on her.

Maurer joined Midday Edition on Monday to talk about some of the highlights and some frightening moments from the journeys. He related how rewarding it was to watch the children grow up over the years. Maurer shared the story of why the boat didn't sell after the family adventures were over and the new life Moana has now as she sets sail on new adventures.

Maurer will also be speaking about his adventures on Wednesday at a meeting of the La Jolla Photo Travelers Club being held at 7:30 p.m. at the Wesley Palms San Diego Retirement Community.

To view PDF documents, Download Acrobat Reader.

Visit link:

San Diego Author Shares Stories Of 15 Years Of Adventures On The High Seas - KPBS

In January, 1973, a reporter for the Los Angeles Times flew to Nice, France, to interview the director Herbert Ross about The Last of Sheila, a mystery picture that he was shooting on the Cte dAzur, much of which took place on a luxurious, hundred-and-sixty-five-foot yacht called H.M.S. Malahne. The gilded ship, which was built in England in 1937 and once helped evacuate soldiers from Dunkirk, became something of a Hollywood fixture in the nineteen-sixties and seventies: it served as the floating production office for Lawrence of Arabia in Jordan, was a regular Mediterranean clubhouse for Elizabeth Taylor and Frank Sinatra, and popped up in The Last of Sheila, as the watery summer home of a sinister film producer played by James Coburn. (There was a kernel of truth buried in this fiction: at the time of filming, H.M.S. Malahne was the property of a womanizing film producer named Sam Spiegel, who was allegedly so handsy with actresses that Billy Wilder once said that he had velvet octopus arms.) Dark things can happen out at sea, when people feel unmoored from both the shoreline and a landlocked sense of morality. The Last of Sheila, written by Anthony Perkins and Stephen Sondheimwho used to host infamous mystery parties together in New Yorkpushes this idea to murderous excess. A group of glamorous strangers (including Raquel Welch, Ian McShane, and Dyan Cannon) set sail, people start dying, and its up to the viewer to discover whodunnit. In his Los Angeles Times interview, Ross acknowledged the inherent creepiness of floating stories: If you have a group of people on a ship, he said, the ship becomes a metaphor for existence, you cant help it.... its about civilization and barbarism.

I could not stop thinking about The Last of Sheila while watching the Season 2 finale of Succession, which traps the Roy family and their closest remora on a superyacht in the Adriatic. Like H.M.S. Malahne, which would look like a dinghy beside the Roys boat (rich people never say yacht), their sea vessel is also the setting for a kind of murder mystery. After a series of scandals involving Waystar Roycos cruise division (dark things happen at sea!), the companys board demands a blood sacrifice, a scapegoat that they can tie up in litigation while the empire sails on, more or less unscathed. Each person who boards the ship knows that they could end up as the one overboard.

Tom Wambsgans (Matthew Macfadyen) and Shiv Roy (Sarah Snook) on the beach.

And yet they look fabulous. Relaxed. Expensive. Carefree. Cool in Top-Siders and floral maxidresses and gossamer pareos. Like Cannon in Sheila, who wore oversized tinted glasses and a circus of colorful caftans and straw hats, even as she was fearing for her life, the Roys, in resort wear, are engaging in high-stakes high fashion, on the high seas.

When I wrote about the fashion on Succession earlier this fall, I argued that the Roys are a family of little pleasure or sparkle, that, in spite of their money, they are tasteful to a fault, dressing protectively in uniforms of beige cashmere rather than in eccentric couture. I spoke to the shows costume designer, Michelle Matland, who told me that this was accuratebut that she could not wait for me to see the finale, where we would get to see a different side of the Roy dress code. I shouldnt even be telling you this, she said, at the time. But they go on a yacht. We get to see them at play.

Even with this tip-off, the Roys maritime peacocking came as a thrilling visual surprise. At last, here was the family in private, dressing only for each other. Sails out, nails out, bro, as Kendall instructed Cousin Greg. And while their fashion choices are more adventurous at seaToms pink linen Ralph Lauren jacket, Shivs flowy white Hobbs jumpsuit with an oversized waist sash, Willas floral Equipment dress, which she likely bought after seeing it on Kate Middletonthere is still a sense of gloom that seeps through the pastels. I spoke to J. Smith-Cameron, who plays Gerri, Waystar Roycos general counsel, who did her best Sue Mengers impression in a series of Cynthia Rowley caftans. Smith-Cameron told me that she wanted to look like she was seasick with stress, even in spangles. We see these people on this plush boat on the Adriatic with delicious food, and theres a pool and a slide and Jet Skis, she said. But everyone is filled with dread. So it was actually meant to be jarring: beautiful surroundings with long faces and furtive glances, not people enjoying themselves. So all of our resort wear is meant to look nice but at the same time be amusingly counter.

Matland echoed this sentiment. Tom, for example, is coming off his disastrous performance at the congressional hearings on Waystar Roycos crimes and is highly agitated, she said. His clothing, which was a lot of Ralph Lauren linen suits, is there to belie the fact that he is on the edge of a breakdown. He is constantly trying to look as if he is comfortablepink linens say honeymoon, vacation, enjoymentbut it is there to cover for the fact that he is unhinged.

Matlands goal with the episode was to telegraph the shared anxiety that each character feels while laundering this panic through the resort-wear section of Bergdorf Goodman. Kendall (Jeremy Strong), who quietly slumps around, wears a tiny Paul Stuart trilby hat (Strongs idea), which Matland says serves as both a security blanket and as a sign that he is feeling deeply insecure. The hat was crumpled, if youll notice, she said. It was purposefully imperfect.

In the final twist, when Kendall turns saboteur, he is back in his city armor: a sharp, fitted Tom Ford suit that almost shines like sharkshin. He sheds the earth tones that he has been wearing all season and dons the color blacka mournful color, but also one that marks him as an assassin, capable of patricide. Hes lost his blingy Oliver Peoples sunglasses, the typical eyewear of rich scions who have a trust fund and personal shoppers who run errands to SoHo; he is at last seeing clearly.

Sunglasses were crucial to this episode, Matland told me, when it came to winking at subtle differences between characters. Shiv, for example, wears traditional Ray-Bans, a sign that she wants to traffic in old-money rituals rather than in flashy ostentation. (It was significant that she did not wear Gucci or Prada, Matland said.) Toms sunglasses in his much memed chicken-stealing moment, right after he breaks down about his unhappy marriage, are Persol, an old-world Italian brand favored by worldly celebrities, most notably by Anthony Bourdain, who wore his pair all over the globe. His shades are as close to representing rebelliousness as one can get in the Roys world. Tom is past his breaking point; hes having his Brando moment.

Logan Roy (Brian Cox) on the top deck of the yacht.

Logan never lets his guard down, even in the sunhis sun hat is wool, from Walker Slater, a tweedy, posh haberdasher from Scotland. Nor does Roman, who, despite being the most feckless character, may also be the most authentic, in that he almost never changes his costume. He has a uniform hes super-comfortable in, Matland said. Blue oxford button-ups. Always.

As for Shiv, most of her boat wear, including her cream pinstripe suits, is Ralph Lauren Purple Label, a sign that she arrived on the ship most prepared for professional ruthlessness. She wants the top job, shes dressed for it, and shes willing to throw her husband under the bus for it, save for a rare moment of weakness in front of her father. Her one whimsical touch is an oversized straw hat with a black ribbon, from the Brooklyn brand Lola, which makes her look pampered and pastoral, like an extra from Anne of Green Gables. Even with her sharp, new-ish bob and architectural wardrobe, Shiv is still a spoiled, priggish little girl who throws tantrums if she cant get her way, and her accessories betray her true nature. (As a side note, Smith-Cameron told me that she was so taken with Shivs hat that she went out and bought one for herself after the episode wrapped.)

In Succession, no detail is out of place. Like a classic whodunnit, it is the kind of show that begs rewatching, studying, squinting at with a gimlet eye. If you run the finale back, you might wonder when exactly Cousin Greg decided to betray Logan and give Kendall the incriminating documents that he stole. Was it while shirtless and in baggy swim trunks, drinking a mediocre ros, or was it while he was wearing a navy Lacoste polo on the Roys private jet? When Greg first boards the yacht, in a striped French blue sweater and tailored khaki shorts, he looks suspiciously like Tom Ripley, a sleek interloper in the world of luxury who is willing to kill to survive. Perhaps even then Greg was eager to turn traitorous. Matland, who worked on the film The Talented Mr. Ripley, understands more than most how to make summer attire appear instantly malevolent. She creates a world of sunny poplins and ivory linens and breathable cottons, but, in the end, we are the ones left holding our breath.

Originally posted here:

Lets Talk About the Yacht Clothes on Succession - The New Yorker

Overfishing is a major problem for the worlds oceans, but a strategy adopted nearly 50 years ago has helped protect fisheries: giving nations exclusive rights to waters 200 miles offshore and letting them police their own fish stocks.

A study by UC Berkeley graduate student Gabriel Englander shows that the nations that reap the most value from fisheries within their exclusive economic zones (EEZs) are the most effective at keeping other nations out. These results, published this week in the journal Nature Sustainability, are the first to demonstrate that assigning property rights to countries leads to the protection of fisheries from unauthorized fishing.

EEZs were first established in the 1970s, giving nations authority over fish, oil and mineral resources in a huge chunk, some 39%, of the worlds oceans. Before that, countries had authority only within three miles of land, leaving the bulk of marine resources free for exploitation.

Using newly available data, Englander found that unauthorized foreign fishing is 81% lower just inside EEZs compared to just outside them. Today, more than 95% of global marine fish catch occurs inside EEZs.

The results could have implications for preserving fisheries in the remainder of the ocean. The United Nations recently convened the Intergovernmental Conference on Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) to consider the creation of new marine protected areas on the high seas, which are remote and costly to police.

BBNJ negotiators could also consider extending property rights to high seas regions as an alternative or complement to high seas marine protected areas, Englander wrote in his paper.

Englander used new data made available in 2017 by Global Fishing Watch on large vessels and their movements in space and time. They were able to make inferences about fishing activity based on a convolutional neural network analysis of vessel movement, allowing Englander to compare fishing inside and outside EEZs.

He found that just 10 EEZ sea regions account for 97% of the global deterrence effect.

The large overall deterrence effect comes from just a couple of places. What these (EEZs) have in common is that they are all valuable near their boundaries, said Englander, who is a fifth-year grad student in the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics of the College of Natural Resources. Because enforcing EEZ boundaries is so expensive, it is only worthwhile for countries with the most valuable fisheries near their boundaries.

These sea regions belong to Argentina, Iceland, Norway, Faroe Islands, Falkland Islands, Canada, Marshall Islands and Peru and contain some of the most vulnerable species, including Argentine Angelshark, Greenland Shark and Atlantic Halibut.

Englanders superb analysis reveals that entry by unauthorized vessels to the EEZs has been deterred, concluded Scott Barrett of Columbia University in a commentary in the same edition of the journal. It remains for future research to show whether this deterrence effect has also caused coastal fisheries to be conserved.

Follow this link:

Best way to protect ocean fisheries? Let nations profit from them - UC Berkeley