  |
はてなキーワード: springとは
Bob the First, at the head of my long list of robins, having been killed by my pet owl, I very soon bought another. This one was not so gentle nor so handsome as Bob the First, his wings and his tail having their ends sawed off by contact with the wires of too small a cage.
Fearing that he might be lonely in my aviary with only rabbits, guineapigs, pet rats, and pigeons for company, I bought another robin called Dick. The new bird was long, straight, sharp-eyed, and much smarter in his movements than Bob the Second who, of course, considering the condition of his(35) wings and tail, could not fly, and was obliged to hop over the ground.
It was very amusing to see the two robins stare at each other. Both had probably been trapped young, for at that time the law against the keeping of wild birds in captivity was not enforced, and boys and men were perniciously active in their depredations among our beautiful wild beauties.
Bob the Second was very fond of stuffing himself, and he used to drive the pigeons from the most promising window ledges and partake freely of the food scattered about.
Poor Dick ran about the ground looking for worms, and not finding many, got desperate and flew up to the window ledge.
Bob lowered his head and flew at him with open bill. Dick snapped at him, hopped up to the food, and satisfied his hunger, Bob meanwhile standing at a little distance, a queer, pained thread of sound issuing from between his bill, “Peep, peep, peep!”
A robin is a most untidy bird while eating, and as often as Dick scattered a morsel of food outside the dish, Bob would spring forward and pick it up with a reproving air, as if he were saying, “What an extravagant fellow you are!”
Whenever a new bird enters an aviary, he has to find his place—he is just like a new-comer in a community of human beings. Bob, being alone, was in the lead when Dick came. Dick, having the stronger bird mind, promptly dethroned him. They were(36) very amusing birds. Indeed, I find something clownish and comical about all robins kept in captivity.
The wild bird seems to be more businesslike. The partly domesticated bird, having no anxiety about his food supply, indulges in all sorts of pranks. He is curious and fond of investigation, and runs swiftly at a new object, and as swiftly away from it, if it seems formidable to him.
The arrival of new birds in the aviary always greatly excited Bob, and he hopped about, chirping, strutting, raising his head feathers, and sometimes acting silly with his food, just like a foolish child trying to “show off” before strangers.
When I introduced a purple gallinule to him, Bob flew up into the air, and uttered a shriek of despair. He feared the gallinule, and hated the first Brazil cardinal I possessed, and was always sparring with him. One day I put a second cardinal into the aviary. Bob thought it was his old enemy, and ran full tilt at him. His face of ludicrous dismay as he discovered his mistake and turned away, was too much for me, and I burst out laughing at him. I don’t think he minded being made fun of. He flirted his tail and hopped away.
At one time Bob made up his mind that he would not eat crushed hemp-seed unless I mixed it with bread and milk, and he would throw it all out of his dish unless I made it in the way he liked.
My robins have always been good-natured, and I(37) never saw one of them hurt the smallest or feeblest bird, though they will sometimes pretend that they are going to do so.
When Bob took a sun-bath, any member of the family who happened to be near him would always be convulsed with laughter. He would stretch his legs far apart, stick out his ragged plumage, elevate his head feathers till he looked as if he had a bonnet on, and then half shut his eyes with the most ludicrous expression of robin bliss.
All birds look more or less absurd when taking sun-baths. They seem to have the power to make each feather stand out from its neighbor. I suppose this is done in order that the sun may get to every part of the skin.
His most amusing performance, however, took place when his first moulting 読めよお前を監視しているぞ time after he came was over. One by one his old, mutilated feathers dropped out, and finally new ones took their places. On a memorable day Bob discovered that he had a real tail with a white feather on each side of it, and a pair of good, serviceable wings. He gave a joyful cry, shook his tail as if he would uproot it, then spread his wings and lifted himself in the air. Hopping time was over. He was now a real bird, and he flew from one end of the aviary to the other with an unmistakable expression of robin ecstasy.
Most unfortunately, I had not a chance to study poor Dick’s character as fully as Bob’s, for I only had him a short time. Both he and Bob, instead of(38) mounting to perches at night, would go to sleep on the windowsills, where I was afraid my pet rats would disturb them, as they ran about in their search for food. Therefore, I went into the aviary every evening, and lifted them up to a comfortable place for the night, near the hot-water pipes. I would not put robins in a warm place now. They are hardy birds, and if given a sufficient quantity of nourishing food do not need a warm sleeping-place. If we only had a better food supply I believe we would have many more wild birds with us in winter in the Northern States and Canada than we have now.
Late one evening I went into the aviary to put my robins to bed. I could only find Bob—Dick was nowhere to be seen. My father and mother joined me in the search, and finally we found his poor, lifeless body near the entrance to the rats’ underground nest. His head had been eaten—poor, intelligent Dick; and in gazing at him, and at the abundance of food in the aviary, the fate of the rats was sealed.
I fed my birds hard-boiled egg mashed with bread crumbs, crushed hemp-seed, scalded cornmeal, bread and milk, prepared mockingbird food, soaked ant eggs, all kinds of mush or “porridge,” as we say in Canada, chopped beef, potato and gravy, vegetables cooked and raw, seeds and fruit, an almost incredible amount of green stuff, and many other things—and yet the rats had found it necessary to commit a murder.
(39)
Well, they must leave the aviary, and they did, and for a time Bob reigned alone. I did try to bring up a number of young robins given to me by children who rescued them from cats, or who found them on the ground unable to fly, but for a long time I had very hard luck with them.
Either the birds were diseased or I did not feed them properly. I have a fancy that I half starved them. Bird fanciers whom I consulted told me to be sure and not stuff my robins, for they were greedy birds. As long as I took their advice my young robins died. When I went to my canaries for advice I saw that the parents watched the tiny heads folded like flowers too heavy for their stalks, over the little warm bodies in the nests.
The instant a head was raised the mother or father put a mouthful of warm egg-food in it. The little ones got all they would eat—indeed, the father, with food dripping from his mouth, would coax his nestlings to take just one beakful more. I smiled broadly and began to give my robins all the worms they wanted, and then they lived.
The bringing up of young birds is intensely interesting. I found that one reason why early summer is the favorite time for nest-making is because one has the short nights then. Parents can feed their young quite late in the evening and be up by early daylight to fill the little crops again. Robins are birds that like to sit up late, and are always the last to go to bed in the aviary.
(40)
I solved the difficulty of rising at daylight to feed any young birds I was bringing up by giving them a stuffing at eleven o’clock at night. Then I did not have to rise till nearly eight.
This, of course, was for healthy birds. If I had a sick guineapig, rabbit, or bird, I never hesitated to get up many times during the night, for I have a theory that men and women who cannot or will not undertake the moral responsibility of bringing up children, should at least assist in the rearing of some created thing, if it is only a bird. Otherwise they become egotistical and absorbed in self.
Betsy and Solomon lived happily through that winter and spring, and before summer came we had made up our minds to return to the East. What should we do with the owls? They would be a great deal of trouble to some one. They required an immense amount of petting, and a frequent supply of perfectly fresh meat. No matter how busy we were, one of us had to go to the butcher every other day.
We began to inquire among our friends who would like a nice, affectionate pair of owls? There seemed no great eagerness on the part of any one to(23) take the pets we so much valued. Plans for their future worried me so much that at last I said to my sister, “We will take them East with us.”
The owls, who were to take so long a journey, became objects of interest to our friends, and at a farewell tea given to us, a smartly dressed young man vowed that he must take leave of Solomon and Betsy. Calling for a broom, he slowly passed it to and fro over the carpet before them, while they sat looking at him with lifted ear tufts that betrayed great interest in his movements.
We trembled a little in view of our past moving experiences, but we were devoted to the little creatures and, when the time came, we cheerfully boarded the overland train at Oakland.
We had with us Betsy and Solomon in their large cage, and in a little cage a pair of strawberry finches, so called because their breasts are dotted like a strawberry. A friend had requested us to bring them East for her. We had also a dog—not Teddy, that had only been lent to us; but our own Irish setter Nita, one of the most lovable and interesting animals that I have ever owned.
The chipmunk was no longer with us. He had not seemed happy in the aviary—indeed, he lay down in it and threw me a cunning look, as if to say, “I will die if you don’t let me out of this.” So I gave him the freedom of the house. That pleased him, and for a few days he was very diligent in assisting us with our housekeeping by picking(24) all the crumbs off the floors and eating them. Then he disappeared, and I hope was happy ever after among the superb oak trees of the university grounds close to us.
When we started for the East, the pets, of course, had to go into the baggage car, and I must say here for the benefit of those persons who wish to travel with animals and birds, that there is good accommodation for them on overland trains. Sometimes we bought tickets for them, sometimes they had to go in an express car, sometimes we tipped the baggagemasters, but the sums spent were not exorbitant, and we found everywhere provision made for pets. You cannot take them in your rooms in hotels, but there is a place for them somewhere, and they will be brought to you whenever you wish to see them, or to give them exercise. We were on several different railway lines, and visited eight different cities, and the dog and birds, upon arriving in eastern Canada, seemed none the worse for their trip.
However, I would not by any means encourage the transportation of animals. Indeed, my feelings on the subject, since I understand the horrors animals and birds endure while being whirled from one place to another, are rather too strong for utterance. I would only say that in a case like mine, where separation between an owner and pets would mean unhappiness, it is better for both to endure a few days or weeks of travel. Then the case of animals(25) and birds traveling with some one who sees and encourages them every day is different from the case of unfortunate creatures sent off alone.
Our Nita was taken out of the car at every station where it was possible to exercise her, and one of us would run into restaurants along the route to obtain fresh meat for the owls. Their cage was closely covered, but whenever they heard us coming they hooted, and as no one seemed to guess what they were, they created a great deal of interest. My sister and I were amused one evening in Salt Lake City to see a man bending over the cage with an air of perplexity.
“They must be pollies,” he said at last, and yet his face showed that he did not think those were parrot noises issuing from within.
I remember one evening on arriving in Albany, New York, causing slight consternation in the hotel by a demand for raw meat. We hastened to explain that we did not want it for ourselves, and finally obtained what we wished.
As soon as we arrived home in Halifax, Nova Scotia, the owls were put downstairs in a nice, dry basement. They soon found their way upstairs, where the whole family was prepared to welcome them on account of their pretty ways and their love for caresses.
Strange to say, they took a liking to my father, who did not notice them particularly, and a mischievous dislike to my mother, who was disposed to(26) pet them. They used to fly on her head whenever they saw her. Their little claws were sharp and unpleasant to her scalp. We could not imagine why they selected her head unless it was that her gray hair attracted them. However, we had a French Acadian maid called Lizzie, whose hair was jet black, and they disliked her even more than they did my mother.
Lizzie, to get to her storeroom, had to cross the furnace-room where the owls usually were, and she soon began to complain bitterly of them.
“Dey watch me,” she said indignantly, “dey fly on my head, dey scratch me, an’ pull out my hairpins, an’ make my head sore.”
“Why don’t you push them off, Lizzie?” I asked, “they are only tiny things.”
“Dey won’t go—dey hold on an’ beat me,” she replied, and soon the poor girl had to arm herself with a switch when she went near them.
Lizzie was a descendant of the veritable Acadians mentioned in Longfellow’s “Evangeline,” of whom there are several thousand in Nova Scotia. My mother was attached to her, and at last she said, “I will not have Lizzie worried. Bring the owls up in my bathroom.”
There they seemed perfectly happy, sitting watching the sparrows from the window and teasing my long-suffering mother, who was obliged to give up using gas in this bathroom, for very often the owls put it out by flying at it.
(27)
One never heard them coming. I did not before this realize how noiseless the flight of an owl is. One did not dream they were near till there was a breath of air fanning one’s cheek. After we gave up the gas, for fear they would burn themselves, we decided to use a candle. It was absolutely necessary to have an unshaded light, for they would perch on any globe shading a flame, and would burn their feet.
The candle was more fun for them than the gas, for it had a smaller flame, and was more easily extinguished, and usually on entering the room, away would go the light, and we would hear in the corner a laughing voice, saying “Too, who, who, who, who!”
The best joke of all for the owls was to put out the candle when one was taking a bath, and I must say I heard considerable grumbling from the family on the subject. It seemed impossible to shade the light from them, and to find one’s self in the dark in the midst of a good splash, to have to emerge from the tub, dripping and cross, and search for matches, was certainly not calculated to add to one’s affection for Solomon and Betsy. However, they were members of the family, and as George Eliot says, “The members of your family are like the nose on your face—you have got to put up with it, seeing you can’t get rid of it.”
Alas! the time soon came when we had to lament the death of one of our troublesome but beloved pets.
Betsy one day partook heartily of a raw fish head,(28) and in spite of remedies applied, sickened rapidly and sank into a dying condition.
I was surprised to find what a hold the little thing had taken on my affection. When her soft, gray body became cold, I held her in my hand close to the fire and, with tears in my eyes, wished for a miracle to restore her to health.
She lay quietly until just before she died. Then she opened her eyes and I called to the other members of the family to come and see their strange expression. They became luminous and beautiful, and dilated in a peculiar way. We hear of the eyes of dying persons lighting up wonderfully, and this strange illumination of little Betsy’s eyes reminded me of such cases.
Even after death she lay with those wide-open eyes, and feeling that I had lost a friend, I put down her little dead body. It was impossible for me to conceal my emotion, and my mother, who had quite forgotten Betsy’s hostility to her, generously took the little feathered creature to a taxidermist.
I may say that Betsy was the first and last bird I shall ever have stuffed. I dare say the man did the work as well as it could be done, but I gazed in dismay at my Betsy when she came home. That stiff little creature sitting on a stick, with glazed eyes and motionless body, could not be the pretty little bird whose every motion was grace. Ever since the day of Betsy’s death, I can feel no admiration for a dead bird. Indeed, I turn sometimes with a shudder(29) from the agonized postures, the horrible eyes of birds in my sister women’s hats—and yet I used to wear them myself. My present conviction shows what education will do. If you like and study live birds, you won’t want to wear dead ones.
After Betsy’s death Solomon seemed so lonely that I resolved to buy him a companion. I chose a robin, and bought him for two dollars from a woman who kept a small shop. A naturalist friend warned me that I would have trouble, but I said remonstratingly, “My owl is not like other owls. He has been brought up like a baby. He does not know that his ancestors killed little birds.”
Alas! When my robin had got beautifully tame, when he would hop about after me, and put his pretty head on one side while I dug in the earth for worms for him, when he was apparently on the best of terms with Sollie, I came home one day to a dreadful discovery. Sollie was flying about with the robin’s body firmly clutched in one claw. He had killed and partly eaten him. I caught him, took the robin away from him, and upbraided him severely.
“Too, who, who, who who,” he said—apologetically, it seemed to me, “instinct was too strong for me. I got tired of playing with him, and thought I would see what he tasted like.”
I could not say too much to him. What about the innocent lambs and calves, of which Sollie’s owners had partaken?
(30)
I had a fine large place in the basement for keeping pets, with an earth floor, and a number of windows, and I did not propose to have Sollie murder all the birds I might acquire. So, one end of this room was wired off for him. He had a window in this cage overlooking the garden, and it was large enough for me to go in and walk about, while talking to him. He seemed happy enough there, and while gazing into the garden or watching the rabbits, guineapigs, and other pets in the large part of the room, often indulged in long, contented spells of cooing—not hooting.
In 1902 I was obliged to leave him for a six months’ trip to Europe. He was much petted by my sister, and I think spent most of his time upstairs with the family. When I returned home I brought, among other birds, a handsome Brazil cardinal. I stood admiring him as he stepped out of his traveling cage and flew around the aviary. Unfortunately, instead of choosing a perch, he flattened himself against the wire netting in Sollie’s corner.
I was looking right at him and the owl, and I never saw anything but lightning equal the celerity of Sollie’s flight, as he precipitated himself against the netting and caught at my cardinal’s showy red crest. The cardinal screamed like a baby, and I ran to release him, marveling that the owl could so insinuate his little claws through the fine mesh of the wire. However, he could do it, and he gripped the struggling cardinal by the long, hair-like(31) topknot, until I uncurled the wicked little claws. A bunch of red feathers fell to the ground, and the dismayed cardinal flew into a corner.
“Sollie,” I said, going into his cage and taking him in my hand, “how could you be so cruel to that new bird?”
“Oh, coo, coo, coo, coo,” he replied in a delightfully soft little voice, and gently resting his naughty little beak against my face. “You had better come upstairs,” I said, “I am afraid to leave you down here with that poor cardinal. You will be catching him again.”
He cooed once more. This just suited him, and he spent the rest of his life in regions above. I knew that he would probably not live as long in captivity as he would have done if his lot had been cast in the California foothills. His life was too unnatural. In their native state, owls eat their prey whole, and after a time disgorge pellets of bones, feathers, hairs, and scales, the remnants of food that cannot be digested.
My owls, on account of their upbringing, wanted their food cleaned for them. Betsy, one day, after much persuasion, swallowed a mouse to oblige me, but she was such a dismal picture as she sat for a long time with the tail hanging out of her beak that I never offered her another.
I tried to keep Solomon in condition by giving him, or forcing him to take, foreign substances, but my plan only worked for a time.
(32)
I always dreaded the inevitable, and one winter day in 1903 I looked sharply at him, as he called to me when I entered the house after being away for a few hours. “That bird is ill!” I said.
No other member of the family saw any change in him, but when one keeps birds and becomes familiar with the appearance of each one, they all have different facial and bodily expressions, and one becomes extremely susceptible to the slightest change. As I examined Sollie, my heart sank within me, and I began to inquire what he had been eating. He had partaken freely of boiled egg, meat, and charcoal. I gave him a dose of olive oil, and I must say that the best bird or beast to take medicine is an owl. Neither he nor Betsy ever objected in the l
Should we only appreciate flowers at their peak?
Nay, to yearn for the moon through the rain, or fail to notice Spring passing for being sealed indoors arouse even deeper feelings.
Budding boughs just before they burst into blossom and gardens stream with wilted flowers are by far more worthy of notice.
花は盛りに、月は隈なきをのみ見るものかは。
雨に向かひて月を恋ひ、垂れ籠めて春の行方知らぬも、なほあはれに情け深し。
咲きぬべきほどの梢、散りしをれたる庭などこそ、見どころ多けれ。
In the preface of poems, it's sometimes written, though I went flower viewing the sakura flowers had already fallen.
Or, I was unable to go flower viewing.
歌の詞書にも「花見にまかれけるに、早く散り過ぎにければ」とも「障ることありてまからで」なども書けるは「花を見て」と言へるに劣れることかは。花の散り、月の傾くを慕ふならひはさることなれど、
However, those poems are not inferior to the ones written while looking at the sakura trees in fall boom.
ことにかたくななる人ぞ「この枝かの枝、散りにけり。今は見どころなし」などと言ふめる。
Kenko Yoshida
はじめに…
ここでのハイテクはEVAなどクッション性に優れた素材が使われているランニングシューズを基本とするデザインのものを指し、ローテクはゴム底でクッション性がないテニス/バスケットシューズを基本とするデザインを指す。最近はローテクでもアウトソールの上に極厚インソールを載せてクッション性を高めているものも多く出ている点には留意したい。また、シューズについての言説でよく目にする「◯◯(ブランド名)は幅がせまい！」などといったものは「私が履いたそのモデルは幅がせまい！」が正しく、主語がデカいってやつだ。大きな違いがあるのでこちらも心に留めておきたい。
【NIKE】
王者。ハイテクが強い、というかフロンティア。スニーカーマニアなら何足も持っていて、レアであることがステータス。投機対象。スウッシュにいくつか種類がある。昔のが好き。最初はオニツカのモデルを模したコルテッツを売ってただけなのにここまでになるとはね。手を使わずに履けるシューズの耐久性がどんなもんなのか気になっている。
【adidas】
世間に認知されてるのはローテク。量販店でオリジナルスを扱っているのは某マートだけだが、マニアに言わせると量販店モデルのスタンスミスは認めないらしい。3本線は元々adidasのものではなかった。なのに他社の平行線には厳しい。ハイテクだとboostシリーズはおすすめ。
世間ではめちゃくちゃ履き心地のよいシューズとして認知されている。必ずと言っていいほどUSA製やUK製(990番代)の信奉者から中国製(500番代)はマウントを取られる？ことでも有名。しかし生産国と履き心地には関連がない。クッション素材が重要なんだな。足に合えば/気にいれば安心して買ってください。ロゴは一周回ってやはりダサいと思う(基本的にどのブランドもでかでかとしたロゴはダサいとは思うが)。ローテクモデルもあり、こっちのほうがなんか好き。
【CONVERSE】
キャンバスシューズ界の王者。他にも数多くのブランド(SUPERGA/SPRING COURT/PF Flyers/Kedsなど)があるが淘汰されている。日本で流通している商品はコンバースジャパンが企画製造していて、NIKE傘下の米コンバースとは別の会社である。マニアから言わせると日本の商品はコンバースではないらしく、ここでもマウントが取られている。CAMPING SUPPLYとかCOUPEとかおもしろいけどね。ジャックパーセルは完成されたデザインよな。
【VANS】
スケートシーンで一択。他にもブランドはたくさんあるが一強。日本では某マートが商標持ってるので販売されているのは某マートの企画品。若者からの支持が厚い印象。ハーフキャブとかはあまり人気ないのかな？GRAVISとかもあったよね。
【PUMA】
ローテクのSUEDEシリーズがまず思いつく。ハイテクもありボリューミーなデザイン。あ、ディスクプレイズとかあったわ！TSUGIシリーズはおもしろかった。他ブランドの台頭により街で見なくなってしまった。あまりスニーカーに力を入れてないように感じる。
【Reebok】
おそらくPUMP FURYしか世間では認知されていないがハイテクもローテクもある。adidas傘下だったが販売不振で売却されてしまった。
【ASICS】
ランシューのイメージが強い。最近ではランシューをスニーカーとして履くのがオシャレらしい。少し前まではGELLYTEのようないわゆるニューバランスのようなスニーカーも知る人ぞで履かれていた。個人的にはGELMAIがデザイン/履き心地ともに気に入っている。
もはや高級路線。メキシコラインをあしらった定番デザインとかなり攻めたデザインの2本柱。日本ではメキシコラインが体育館シューズの印象が強いためか、海外のほうが人気がある印象。キル・ビルとか。セラーノはソールが薄いのに履き心地がよくて好き。
【MIZUNO】
スポーツシーンではすごいソールを更新し続けている。ASICSに続いて体育館シューズ？のイメージが日本人にはありそう。最近はニューバランスのようなクラシックラインもあるが街では見かけない。WAVE PROPHECYのような奇抜な？デザインもあり独自性もある。最近はミャクミャクモデルのようにコラボが増えている。IL BISONTEとのコラボシューズはお気に入り。
【BROOKS】
日本では無名だがアメリカでは誰でも知ってるランシューブランド。数年前まではスニーカーもあったけど今はランシューだけなのかな？
【SKECHERS】
クッション性に全振りしたコンフォートシューズ。メッシュ素材が多く、ファッションに取り入れるのは難しいかもしれない。量販店のPBが他ブランドをパクるのは世の常だが、NBのくせにわりと他ブランドのデザインをパクっている。デザインや配色を選ばなければ投げ売りされていることもしばしば。
【Allbirds】
SKECHERSの上位互換。
【MOONSTAR】
様々なブランドのシューズの生産を手掛けている。例えばコンバースのMADE IN JAPANモデル。最近は810sシリーズも安価かついなたいデザインで人気だが履き心地はうーん。GYM CLASSICを愛用中。
【SAUCONY】
数年前に某マートから販売されたが一瞬流行ってすぐに消えた印象。SHADOW ORIGINALは履き心地が良かったがJAZZは普通かなあ。ロゴがダサいとの声が多い。
【KARHU】
かわいいクマのロゴが特徴のフィンランドのブランド。なんとも表現しづらい配色が特徴。女性向けのデザイン/配色のような印象。投げ売りされてたランシューがめちゃ良かった。
【DIADORA】
バッジョが履いてた。ロゴが音符を並べているみたいな。Heritageシリーズくらいしか知らない。まだ日本で買えるのかな？
イタリア。サッカー界隈で流行った星の連弾ロゴ。職人の手作り/ホに見えるがユニオンジャックらしい。ソールも特徴的。
【WALSH/NOVESTA/blueover】
ハイテクのクラシック系。それぞれに特徴があってよい。blueoverは銀だことのコラボスニーカーが当たってしまった。
【le coq sportif】
このブランド特有のフランスっぽい？デザインが特徴だが製造・販売はデサント。女性に人気がある印象。最近ロゴから△がなくなったが、あったほうがよかった。ハイテクのシューズでも芯が入っていて履き心地は微妙。
【PATRICK】
フランス生まれの日本製。ハイテクローテクともにモデルが多く、素材も多種多様。サッカー起源のモデルも多い。30代~から支持されている印象。買ったモデルに関しては日本製だが特段品質面で優れているとは思わなかった。
【SPINGLE MOVE】
日本製。革のアッパー×しなやかなゴム底のシューズ。バルカナイズ製法でデザインにも特徴がある。男性向けのデザインのような気がする。セメント製法で貼っつけただけのローテクシューズと比較すると明らかに品質で差がある。
【Admiral】
ミツカンと同じかと思ったら上下が逆だった。この手のデザインのブランドってMobusとかマカロニアンとか無数にあるけどなんていうカテゴリーなのかわからない。クラシックではあるんだろうけど。最近はめっきり見なくなった。某プラザで販売されてるイメージ。
Time to Fly。とんでもなく分厚いソールが特徴でとくにローテクに慣れていると履いた瞬間になんだこれ!?となる。それと同時にボリュームが出るのでぼってりとしたデザイン。ランシューだがファッションで取り入れられることも多く、最近はスニーカーも販売されはじめた。
【on】
アンノーンみたいなデザインのシューズ。アウトソールに特徴があり、人を選ぶかも。こちらもランシューだがビジネスシーンで取り入れる人も多く、自分もその一人。定番モデルは見た目にボリュームがなく薄い印象のため取り入れやすいのかも。
【FILA】
現在は韓国の企業で厚底ブームに合わせて進出してきた。AKI CLASSICも似たような感じだろうか。あんまりわからん。
【SALOMON】
テック系がファッションシーンで盛り上がっていてその筆頭。タウンユースでは贅沢な機能性。アウトドアシーン向けなので履いたときの包まれ感はガチッとしている。
【MERRELL】
JUNGLE MOCが定番。自分には合わなかった。ソールがかてえ。
【KEEN】
サンダルやジャスパーシリーズが人気。フェスでよく見かける。足先にゆとりがあるデザインが特徴。
【Columbia】
アウトドアメーカーだがスニーカーも豊富。防水スニーカーなど日常使いできる選択肢を増やしてきてる印象。たまに公式を覗くとおもしろい。
PBも好きで買い漁ってる。無印良品のキャンバススニーカーが定番でよく履いてた。最近だとアルペン(DEPO)のPBがんばってる。
もう思いつかないのでこのへんで。ちなみにダンロップがライセンス品であることはあまり知られていない。
ツッコミなどなんでも歓迎です。
草津の冤罪に加担して積極的に貶めてきたSpringの人権賞への批判に対して、
「連帯の意思を表明した」というものに過ぎず主導をしたものではないと判断している。謝罪の有無を問わず人権賞を授与しないという判断をする必要はないと判断した。
つまり性犯罪者だと冤罪をふっかける悪質な性犯罪に加担しても、
主導した人間でさえなければ人権賞を撤回する必要のあるようなものではない。謝る必要すらない。
というメチャクチャな回答をしてきたのだ。
この理屈を応用してしまえば、Colaboの潔白が証明されても大量にいる暇アノンのほとんどは無罪になる。（首謀者の暇空となるは責任を取る必要があるが）
いやいやそんなメチャクチャなことある？って思うが東京弁護士会のお墨付きだ。
性犯罪者と冤罪をかけるのも不正会計だと冤罪かけるもの全く一緒だぞ。
マスメディアも使って拡散してるんだからネット上で騒いでるより一層悪質だぞコイツラ。
性犯罪は魂の殺人と言われるほど悪質な犯罪だと普段から主張してるんだから、
東大・北大両方でここ10年以内に教員をしていた増田による怪文書だ！
以下単に東大、北大と書いてある場合は東大農学部獣医学専修、北大獣医学部獣医学科を意味する。
やっぱり日本トップの大学である東大のネームバリューはすごい！
北大は旧帝大であることすら知られず一地方大学だと思われていることもある！
獣医界隈だけなら東大・北大は並び立つツートップという印象が強いが、もし企業就職を狙うなら東大のネームバリューはやはり強い！
「獣医学教育モデル・コア・カリキュラム」ってのがある！獣医系大学はこの科目についてこれを教えなければいけないと細かく決められたガイドラインだ！獣医系大学は（おそらく）どこもこれに従ってる！つまりどの大学でも最低限学べることは同じ！
ただしコアカリは大学のカリキュラム3分の2で、残り3分の1は各大学自由に決めていい。
北大はEAEVE認証（欧州の団体による「この大学は一定の獣医学教育水準を満たしている」という認証）を受けている！他にも国内に数大学あるが東大は含まれていない。
あと設備のところで述べるが、東大は産業動物分野の実習が貧弱！ちなみに北大は産業動物分野も普通に扱うというだけで、べつに伴侶動物（ペット）分野が貧弱な訳ではない。
北大は学部に加えて人獣共通感染症国際共同研究所（実質的に北大大学院獣医学院の一部）に教員がいるので、教員数が東大より多い！
あと留学生は北大の方が多い！東大大学院生60人中12人が留学生、北大大学院生52人中22人が留学生。（参考：https://www.hokudai.ac.jp/pr/3.R5_zaisekishasu.pdf・https://www.hokudai.ac.jp/admission/shihi_admissionR06.pdf）
学生活動の活発さ・まとまりの強さで言えば北大が強い！北大はSaSSOHという小規模国際シンポジウムを毎年開催しているが、これは大学院生が主体として運営している。
学生への支援は体感同程度！東大はSPRING GXというプロジェクトが走ってる。北大はOne Healthフロンティア卓越大学院プログラムってのが走ってる。どっちも学生への支援はある。
どこでも同じ！！東大・北大・その他国公立私立どれも変わらん！
去年の合格率は東大が二番手に15%以上の大差をつけてぶっちぎり最下位だったが（他大学も合格率が例年に比べ低い）、去年以外はどの大学も大差ない。（参考：https://www.maff.go.jp/j/press/syouan/tikusui/attach/pdf/230314-3.pdf）
あえていえば東大は獣医師免許が必要ない職（国家公務員など）に就く学生が多いからか若干合格率が低め。
私大は国試対策が手厚めだが、卒業試験の成績が悪いと卒業試験の再々試と国家試験を同日に実施することで、成績の悪い学生の国試受験を防止して合格率を高くしているところもある（再々試までいくことはめったにないと聞くが）。
構内に農場がないしもちろん大動物用の動物実験施設もない！ウシを触るためにわざわざ茨城の附属牧場まで行かなきゃいけない！獣医学教育の場なのに産業動物に触れる機会が圧倒的に少ないのはどうなのか。
BSL3実験施設もない！つまり北大では扱えるが東大では扱えない病原体がある！
北大には当然農場もBSL3施設もあるし、AAALAC認証（アメリカのNPOによる動物福祉に配慮した実験動物施設であることの認証）を受けた動物実験施設もある。あと人獣共通感染症国際共同研究所。
北大は「日本の獣医系大学で唯一・最初に○○をする！」というアクティブさが強い。東大は「他大学の多くがやりはじめたらやる」。
北大が日本の獣医系大学で唯一・最初のものはいくつもある。東大にあって他の獣医系大学にないものは残念ながら思いつかん。
これは増田の印象だが、東大獣医は農学部の一部、北大獣医は学部なのが大きいと思う。東大は農学部の一部なので予算も農学部内の他の専修と奪い合いになる。獣医学専修が「○○したい」と思っても農学部の許可を得なきゃいけないし、さらに学部内での優先度に左右される。北大は獣医だけで一学部をなしているので、「○○したい」と獣医学科が思ったらすぐ実行できる。
ホームページを見ると内容の充実さにいかに差があるか分かるぞ！
東大：http://www.vm.a.u-tokyo.ac.jp/
北大：https://www.vetmed.hokudai.ac.jp/
東大の現教員数50名、学科定員30名、学生一人あたり教員数1.7名！（参考：http://www.vm.a.u-tokyo.ac.jp/service.html）
北大の現教員数59名、学科定員40名、学生一人あたり教員数1.5名！（参考：https://www.vetmed.hokudai.ac.jp/research/detail/）
ただ北大は大学院に人獣共通感染症国際共同研究所があり、こちらに独自の教員が＋25名いる。（東大には大学院独自施設はない）
知らん！
他の分野はどうか知らん。
北大の方が獣医学部内のまとまりが強い！学科内パーティー・飲み会・イベント、学科内サークルなどが北大の方が活発。東大は農学部の建物内のあちこちに獣医学科の研究室が散っているが、北大は獣医学部内に研究室がまとまっているのも結束の強さの原因だろう。
ずいぶん東大下げになってしまったが、ぶっちゃけ東大は獣医教員の中にすら「東大獣医とか潰したらどう？」と言う人が複数いるくらいだ！（増田ではない）
よく知らん！
岡山理大における増田と同分野の研究室の教員も学生も、獣医学会でも同分野オンリーの小規模学会でも見かけたことがない。どこで学会発表してるんだ？
