The Manhattan Project

Hello and welcome back to my blog. Recently we had our first exhibition of the year, and in this post I will talk about the experience as well as the project which went along with it.

To begin, the idea of the project which we would showcase at the exhibition was to tie together the idea of conceptual art with the Manhattan Project and start of the nuclear age. We would be making conceptual art pieces about the development of nuclear weapons.

In the beginning of the project, we explored many aspects of the Manhattan Project, like the science behind it, the geopolitical context of the period, and the consequences of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during the Second World War. In regards to this, we read and critiqued the book Hiroshima by John Hersey, which I previously wrote a critical summary on that you can see here. The goal of reading this book was to understand the consequences of the bombings, but more significantly to warn of the consequences if a full scale nuclear war were to break out afterwards. As well as the critical summary at the end, throughout our reading of the book we went through 3 Socratic seminars where we discussed various aspects of the literature and debated on topics such as historical significance of individuals, the book, among others. These discussions allowed for us to generate a more developed perspective on the meaning behind the book and historical significance as a whole.

But the consequences of the Manhattan project aren’t all bad, we also looked into the advances in medicine, power generation and culture which in many ways contributed to current prosperity in much of the world, including Japan.

On the conceptual art side of the project, we began by learning the history of the art form and how it came to be. To explore the topic further, we went as a class on a field trip to the Contemporary Art Gallery, and the Vancouver Art Gallery. At the Vancouver Art Gallery there was an exhibit about the works of Yoko Ono, a very prominent conceptual artist probably best known for her relationship with John Lennon.

In this gallery our understanding of conceptual art was tested as we had to choose a piece of art to analyze. I choose a piece called “Bag Piece”, which was a black cotton bag in which an individual or two would go inside and do whatever they wanted. The viewers couldn’t see what was happening inside the bag, but the performer could vaguely see outside. My evaluation of the meaning is two fold, the first being that the individual is the art, and the bag just compliments it, giving it variation. The second being that it forces you to use your imagination and highlights the preconceived notions that may come to mind when you are forced to come up with your own meaning for what you are seeing.

Once we understood both concepts, it was time to tie them together with our exhibition pieces. I decided that for my art piece, I should attempt to convey a message and raise concern about government and military secrecy in how they created and continue to develop weapons which raise significant ethical concerns, yet there is no consultation on. I chose this because the Manhattan Project is the greatest example of this in history, having not even most of the workers know what they were making, and there were hundreds of thousands of them.

To accomplish this I decided to pull on the knowledge I acquired learning about the Manhattan Project, and base my piece on Chicago Pile-1, the secretive first nuclear reactor build below a stadium in downtown Chicago, which kickstarted the Manhattan project. I choose this because it both literally and metaphorically has the world changing “beneath our feet”, as well as being without public knowledge.

To represent this, I used a photo of the stadium the real reactor was built below, and mounted it on a black box with a translucent black curtain in front. On the curtain was the prompt “What is the cost before we ask questions? 200k lives? The human race?”, as to highlight the inaction of the people in probing these issues, and the potential for these weapons to destroy humanity. Inside the black box I placed a remote controlled arc generator which emitted light and sound. This had several meanings, the first being to serve to sort of scare yet intrigue the viewer into the reality of what happens behind closed doors. The auditory and visual affects are meant to give a hint of the big picture yet obscure it, just like the situation of the Manhattan Project workers. Also, it just serves to represent the reactor. Attached is my written explanation shown on exhibition night.

Now, for the exhibition we were put into various groups of similar art pieces. My group was science and technology, which my piece fit somewhat well for. For the room we were presenting in, we decorated with a scientific theme, wearing lab goggles, white shirts to represent lab coats, and put general items that related to the topic around the room. With some music and a introduction video at the entrance, the room came together quite well to fit the theme.

Additionally I also participated in the production of an introduction video at the entrance to the entire class’s exhibit.

The exhibition night itself went quite well, and many of the visitors were interested in my art piece and the meaning behind it. The arc generating device I had in my piece definitely got attention as well as surprised many. I think I was able to communicate both my art’s personal message, and the historical significance of the Manhattan Project quite well. Here is what the pieced looked like, however it is difficult to understand when not in person.

Having been able to learn, communicate and evaluate the consequences of the Manhattan Project, I think that it is clear that it’s effects reverberate throughout the world and it undoubtedly is one of the most historically significant events of recent centuries.


Recently in correlation with a Humanities project, I was tasked with reading the novel Hiroshima by John Hersey. A short introduction to the book would be that it is the retelling by the author of the stories of six survivors of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, compiled in the year following the event, and then later modified to show their stories around 40 years later.

I believe that the first thing that we should establish from the text is the theme, or what we think the author wants to tell us or make us think. I believe that while this text is primarily classified as journalism, it is irrefutable that the book is framed from the perspective of survivors of the bombing, without much show of any alternative point of view. This makes it hard to weigh the ethics like a truly neutral journalistic interpretation of the events would strive for. I don’t think that you could counter this by claiming the argument is the middle ground logical fallacy either, since there is no attempt to discredit an alternative argument. This leads me to believe that the theme of this text must be: to act as a source in highlighting the at the time overlooked tragedy of the bombing and its consequences, which unfortunately fell on the deaf ears of the powers and governments of the world, who continued in their pursuit to acquire more and more destructive weapons. This would be a far more future and preventative based outlook on the events than debating the ethics of them, which is reflective of the lack of international opinions, since that would work as an alternative to make the book a more neutral source of information.

That’s my modern interpretation of the theme, but it’s important to recognize that nowadays being this many years from the war, the book does lack as much value in countering an anti Japanese hive mentality stirred by the events of the war. Not knowing that this is probably the context, may skew the modern interpretation of the theme. We could best get an interpretation of this mentality of the time from propaganda posters like the one below, which is one of the least racially insensitive of the many.

Seeing that the message is one of preventative activism, I think that the writing does a powerful job of showing this. The third person style while repeatedly dropping the name of the character we’re following makes for a more immersive story. This is because it is a reminder of the human aspect of the character which makes it easier to connect with them. Another point related to the form of writing, which I heard from discussing with others about the book, is the omniscient form of narration which shows the character’s feelings in a full and powerful way. Furthermore, the consistent emphatic tone glues the book and the 6 survivors’ stories together into a common cause. The book is also clearly aiming for stories over statistics, as it throws no numbers out—which you likely couldn’t fully comprehend the scale of, and just tells the stories bluntly.

The last section of the book puts a strong emphasis on the long term effects of the bomb. Every individuals’ story mentions long term radiation sickness issues which they had for the rest of their lives(or long periods), and we can see from quotes like this, ““If a person says to me that he is weary [darui], if it is a hibakusha who says it, it gives me a different feeling than if he is an ordinary person. He doesn’t have to explain….He knows all of the uneasiness—all of the temptation to lose spirit and be depressed—and of then starting again to see if he can do his job….”, that the shared experience and problems of survivors stick with them, while a non survivor may not understand what they’ve been through, similar to the reader of the book. And yet throughout Mr. Tantimoto’s story in this harrowing section, we see messages about more and more countries creating nuclear weapons. This map below shows which countries have ignored calls for nuclear disarmament and produced the weapons.

My personal conclusion from reading this book, is that it serves as an effective medium for spreading a message of warning to the world to think carefully about using weapons of mass destruction, or else face the severe consequences felt by the residents of Hiroshima, but on a far greater scale.

Significance of Gunpowder

It’s difficult to come up with a single thing that is most significant to humanity. You could go with the Big Bang or God creating the earth depending on your beliefs, but to get more recent is difficult. However, we can see through how significant and widespread their impact was, which events have has a profound impact on society, and that brings me to the topic of this post. The historical significance of the invention of gunpowder.

I don’t think there is any objective opinion that can state gunpowder was an insignificant invention. It was revolutionary in every sense of the word. Revolutionary to technology, revolutionary to industry, revolutionary to armed revolutions. Even the initial formula that has lasted nearly 1200 years is still in use, and was only phased out in the mainstream at the start of the 20th century.

Since it’s inception in 9th century China, gunpowder’s influence has only grown and grown all over the world. It almost immediately saw it’s use in weapons begin in China, and gradually made it’s way west until the 13th century where it reached Europe. Europe’s lack of nomadic raiders was the perfect political and warring environment for the expansion of the gun, and how it was modified over time. 

This adoption of the gun in Europe became extremely significant during the age of exploration and colonization of the Americas, as these more advanced weapons gave the Europeans a strong advantage in colonial wars. The conquistadors in the Spanish Empire are a prime example of this, since technology like this allowed them defeat empires like the Aztec and Incans in combat.

But the gun isn’t the only thing gunpowder has been a conduit to. As it was the first explosive created in human history, it paved the way for other explosives and explosive concepts, important to the economic development of nations and life as we know it too. The use of explosives in mining being the main example that comes to mind, but also railway and road construction, avalanche control, and non military firearm purposes like hunting, sport and pest extermination. Even the combustion engine used in most vehicles relies on a concept of controlled explosions to function. 

You could even find all sorts of symbols which don’t directly involve gunpowder, but are a result of it nonetheless. What’s known as the anonymous mask or Guy Fawkes mask for example, doesn’t use gunpowder, but has prominence because of the gunpowder plot to blow up the House of Lords in the early 1600s.

All of this is possible, just because of a few Chinese monks 1200 years ago. I think this is not only a strong example of historical significance, but also the butterfly effect, as one individual looking for medicine influenced an unthinkable number of events and lives, all across the world.

Building A Better Canada

Hello and welcome back to my blog. As you may have seen from my last two posts, the project and focus of my PLP work over the past month and a half has been Canada’s political system. The main idea of the project was to understand how the system works, and what change we would like to see. This project felt very relevant to me as I am generally quite interested in Canadian politics, and have quite of sophisticated knowledge of our system.

The first milestone of this project, which coincided with the timing of the 2021 Canadian federal election, was to just write a reflection about the 2021 election as a blog post, which you can see here. I focused on a topic that I found very interesting that I had personally looked into during the 2019 election, which was the effect that the People’s Party of Canada had on the election. I also talked about my criticisms of the Senate of Canada under the current system.

Next was the main part of the project, which was creating a theoretical political party that would represent the changes we would personally want to see in policy and our system. In my group for this task were Alexee, Grace and Owen. Their blogs are linked here if you would like to check our their posts. Once we had our group, we had to brainstorm ideas for party policy that we could all agree with, but agreeing with each other didn’t turn out to be too much of an issue.

We started putting together our party by making a statement of intent slideshow, showing the main points our party will cover that we discussed previously. Though ours lacked aesthetics and detail, it does showcase quite well our understanding of what we would change about our political system if we could.

Next was a press release, which we went far deeper on the content mentioned in the statement of intent. You can see my post about that here. This is where we ironed out our policies that would be used for our final platform and video later on.

Finally, we made a video ad for our party to showcase our platform in under two minutes. This can be seen above. We try to follow a model of highlighting issues, and then providing our solutions to them for the ad in a sort of storyline to follow, where our party is shown as the solution to our problems. The video is a mix of my group members and I talking, as well as relevant Creative Commons images throughout with captions quoting what we are saying we should change to best govern ourselves.

Since our party is based on representing all of Canada, we tried to make the backgrounds we talk against be as relevant as possible to all of Canada while just filming in our local area. This led us to pick one location by the water to film to represent the coasts, one by apartments to represent an urban environment, one in a forest to represent more of rural or remote Canada and one section at the school to represent the younger generation.

The video came together quite well except the flow of transition between a couple of the policies. Or so we thought, as when we presented our video, a volume error in the editing made our section about the Senate and Supreme Court into a loud cacophony of noise that sounded like it would destroy the speakers it was playing on, but we fixed that right after.

Now, earlier in the project we used a tool called the CBC Vote Compass, which asks you questions about different political issues, and compares your results to the major political parties. I decided to take the test using our party platform for the answers, answering neutral or the status quo for ones we don’t cover, and then added our party acronym to the chart. You can see where the tool thinks our party stands below. It is about where I would expect, except more socially conservative which is odd seeing as our party is based on neutrality on social issues, which leads me to think that the compass may potentially conflate regional issues applicable to the west as socially conservative based on a sort of political stereotypes rather than their real applications.

Thank you for reading my blog, I hope you enjoyed this latest update on my learning in PLP.

Dominion Revival Party

Hello and welcome back to my blog. Our most recent project in PLP, is to think up a new political party with a group. The party my group has come up with, is the Dominion Revival Party. Our party is for the people. Our primary policy and goal is governmental reform so all Canadians have a more equal voice, and we can eliminate regional preferences. The name stems from the fact that we are trying to revive the founding principles of our dominion, one of which is representation of all people/regions.

One of our biggest policies is senate reform. This is relevant to one of my most recent posts which was about the 2021 Federal Election, in which I talk about many issues with the Senate of Canada as it is. The biggest thing that we think needs to be changed in the senate is the seat distribution. Currently BC, Alberta and Ontario are significantly underrepresented. We vow to change that. As for the appointment aspect of the senate, we do not wish for an elected senate as to not cause a battle for power and legitimacy between the two houses.

Another issue of regional representation that we would like to fix is Supreme Court appointment quotas, as by guaranteeing an overly large amount of seats to one region, you deny others their fair share, as well as potential talent a chance.

Lots of people like to use proportional representation as their buzz word for electoral reform, but we actually see the issues with it, and wish for better changes to our system. Our party believes in a maintenance of first past the post ridings as they better represent the constituents in them, and allow MPs to bring up localized issues. However, we will implement a system where all federal ridings are reviewed every five years (every census) to ensure they are fair, and redone if they have large population disparities. Also in regard to MPs representing their constituents, we believe that having a set social policy in our party is a negative, so we maintain that party politics should stay out of social policy and those matters should be proposed and voted on with freely by MPs representing their constituents rather than parties as a whole.

Our party is based on a centrist economy policy, but we do believe in responsible spending by government. Part of this, along with being more fair to all regions, is to reform the equalization payment formula, as it unnecessarily gives extra money to certain provinces when it isn’t needed, and they can cover more of their own expenses.

If you want to hear our other members takes on our policies, you can check out their blogs too. They are Alexee, Grace and Owen.

Election 2021

Image Source: National Post

Hello and welcome back to my blog. As most of you reading this post probably know, Canada has just had another federal election, and it is my task here today to write about it.

To sum up this election I would just call it wasteful, seeing as it has provided nothing to any party apart from minute regional gains for the Liberals in the west, and conservatives in the Atlantic, cancelling each-other out, with the NDP doing ever so slightly better. The Bloc Québécois saw virtually no change, and that shows that the division in Quebec isn’t going anywhere fast. This all seems to prove true what pundits were describing when they said it was a “600 million dollar Cabinet Shuffle”, but it very well could have ended differently.

Justin Trudeau could thank a lot of people for his ability to retain government after what has happened, after all, just a couple weeks ago he was polling at several points below the Conservative party, but I think that there is one man who has done more than any liberal to save the Liberals themselves this time around. That man is the leader of the People’s Party of Canada, Maxime Bernier.

Now, Bernier’s party didn’t win a single seat, and Bernier actually did quite a bit worse than last election in his own riding of Beauce, however after capitalizing off of the lack of opposition to policies like vaccine passports, he managed to grow his federal support, garnering over 5% of the popular vote federally and into the teens percentage wise in parts of the prairies. This had one crucial effect on the election, it split the right wing vote, something not seen at this level since before the Canadian Alliance and Progressive Conservative merger in 2003.

I ran through every riding using the CBC results tracker, and created a map to show just how important the split was. By adding the Conservative and PPC results together I found out that the PPC had single handedly potentially lost the conservatives 24 ridings, as their combined votes would have won that many more. Here is the map with the 24 ridings in blue that would have had different results should this little experiment have actually happened.

Taking into account the parties currently winning the aforementioned ridings as of time of writing, that would give us a conservative minority government rather than liberal. The composition in the House of Commons would look like this:

CPC: 143 (up 24 from 2021 results)

Lib: 140 (down 18)

Bloc: 33 (down 1)

NDP: 20 (down 5)

Green: 2 (same result)

Here is a juxtapose I made of the parliament seats without the vote split on the left and with it on the right. You can slide the bar in the middle to see how the results change.

As results are still coming in as of the time I am writing this, I cannot be sure things will not change, and I could have missed a riding, but this is the most comprehensive look I have seen on the topic thus far.

On a slightly different topic, another observation that can be made about these results is that the Conservative party has once again won the popular vote nation wide, like in 2019.

Senate seats by province and territory.

Another thing that has remained constant through the election, and seems like it will always be is the crazy system within the Senate of Canada. Looking back at the historical debates for confederation, you can see the senate was initially meant as appeasement towards Quebec in order to be able to implement proportional representation in the House of Commons, with a complimentary role in allowing good politicians in the country be able to serve in Parliament without worrying about being kicked out because their specific electoral division does not agree with their party or policy. On the topic of the former, it seems to have failed. On the topic of the latter, it also seems to have failed. The reason I say this is because the Quebec senate issue isn’t mainstream at all, and there are two reasons I say the other is a failure, and one is quite connected to the current administration. The first is that by basing senate seats on regions rather than population, it really just prevents regions like BC and Alberta from being able to send anywhere close to the number of politicians to the senate which represent them. This can easily be seen when you look at the fact they have around 800,000 people per senator when the Atlantic provinces are around 100,000 per senator. The second reason I eluded to earlier is that the Liberals in 2015 had a plan to bring in a non partisan senate, which would really help in theory with the local partisanship issue, but the Independent Senators Group which they brought in turned out to just be a lie. The group votes with the Liberal Government 94.5% of the time, and the government uses a Liberal party database to look at candidates for appointment. A continued liberal government, regardless if minority or majority will allow unimpeded appointment to the senate, which is partially why I brought up this topic.

In the end, this election really hasn’t changed much, but it has sent a message to both Prime Minister Trudeau and Erin O’toole, that neither of them are providing what Canadians want in order to get on board with either party and pull off a majority. 

Deep Cove and 1950s Canada

Hello and welcome back to my blog. This will be the summative post for the most recent project we have done. This project was focused on the 1950s, the history of Deep Cove, and Canadian identity. Join me, as I reflect on the work I created for this project, and how it connects to the core competencies and driving question. Also, be sure to have a listen to the podcast episode I made, embedded right below.

The driving question for this project was “How did Canadian life develop after WW2”. My thesis statement that I would use to answer this is that: The effects of the Second World War influenced Canadians of all walks of life. The effects were substantial in both economic and social nature, and lead to prosperity but also political tension with the orient.

I think that this can be supported by the various examples shown in my evidence work for the competencies shown below.

For this project, there were two main competencies. Those being “continuity and change” and “discuss, listen and speak”. Both are quite self explanatory. I will break each of them down below, and the work I did that represents them.

The first competency is continuity and change.

The first example I would like to bring up is the final podcast, which is embedded above. I think that this is a good example of continuity and change because that is basically what the focus of the episode itself is. In this episode, I go over the ways that deep cove has changed over the last 100 years, and how it had stayed the same. Rather than take the traditional route of finding an interview for this episode, I used what I think was actually a better source as a solution to the problem. Instead I used clips from an interview from 1987 conducted by the Deep Cove Heritage Society, with whom we collaborated with for this project as a whole. I think that this was a better alternative for a couple reasons. The first is that the amount of potential interviewees with relevant information to natural resources in Deep Cove is dwindling if not nearly or fully extinct as is, so this provides more first hand information. The second is that it allowed me to use more of the material provided by the Deep Cove Heritage Society, which I think they would be happy about. Please take a listen to the podcast above if you haven’t already.

The second example of continuity and change that I will bring up, is a milestone we did at the beginning of the project. For this milestone, we all conducted interviews with different prominent Deep Cove residents. I think this represents continuity and change well, as most of the topics discussed in these interviews were relevant to how the community had evolved over time, and people’s thoughts on it.

My third piece of evidence for this competency is a writing activity we had to do where we had to write a few paragraphs summing up all the things we learned to answer the driving question, which is mentioned at the start of the post. Here is what I wrote.

The next competency was “discuss, listen and speak”.

I think the biggest example of this competency is a milestone called “Canadian Connections”. For this we had to create a keynote presentation about a topic of our choice, as long as it was related to the 1950s and our podcast topic. For this presentation I focused on the 1940s-50s Alberta oil boom, and continuity and change with the industry today. I then of course, presented it to the class, which I think was quite successful in communicating most of my points, and fitting within the allotted time frame. Here is the slideshow if you’re interested.

My next examples are also presentations I did in class. The first, was a presentation we had to do about the different topics related to the Canadian Bill of Rights. My group’s presentation was about the Charter of Rights and Freedoms that came after. My slide what about the absence of property rights in the charter and the reasons for that. I think I was able to discuss these topics well with my group and present quite well.


Later on, we had to do another presentation. This time it was on any current event in the news. My group did ours on the unfortunate recent discovery at the former Kamloops residential school. I think that our presentation for this also went quite well.

I also think the podcast mentioned before represents this competency quite well.

All said, the importance of the change during or caused by this period in Canada’s history cannot be understated, and affect us significantly today.

Thank you for reading my post about this recent project. Hope you enjoyed.

Cans, Puzzles and the 1950s

Last week, as we slowly began to wrap up our studies of the 1950s, we delved into several of the aspects of everyday life for those at the time. As one of the activities during the week, we looked at and played examples of games and to some extent toys of the 1950s, and how children used them. Some examples of the ones we looked into were kick the can and hopscotch.

Though quite indirect, I did make somewhat of a personal connection to this as it reminded me of a baguenaudier puzzle made as a pastime for and by one of my relatives who worked in the stables in Cranbrook, BC in the early 1900s. I unfortunately don’t have a photo but I will put a very similar one below.

Image of a similar puzzle:

I think that this connects to the topic of games in the 1950s, because it embodies the primary fundamental aspects of games in both times. Those being material and/or mechanical simplicity, affordability, and being a good way to pass time. Two of these points stick out as major examples of life in the 1950s as a whole, or at least how we recognize it now, those points being the first and third one. I think that the first is relevant, because our entire interpretation of the 1950s tends to be based on the uniformity and ease of life in the period, as opposed to the more technologically advanced and sedulous modern day. The third thing mentioned earlier ties into this, as the less assiduous and advanced times of the period left much more spare time to waste, which seemingly silly games can attest to the presence of.

Thanks for reading my blog, hope you found it interesting.

A-Z in Canadian History

Recently in class last week, we had an interesting activity, where, in groups, we had to come up with one thing for each letter of the alphabet that we thought make us proud to be Canadian and that war relevant in the 1950s. This lead to lots of examples like names and government legislation in the era.

I found this activity rather enjoyable as I’m very interested in the history of Canada, as my podcast can attest to. For this reason, I thought that I should come up with my own list, but far more broadly focused on the history of Canada, and more based on importance to Canadian identity, or importance to the world rather than what would be popular. Here is the general list I came up with. Items like insulin are ones invented or made practical to use by Canadians. I’ve tried to avoid areas of bias in my examples that may have came up due to my own family’s experience and history in Canada since the 1700s.

A: Agricultural History (Because of immigrants and the World Wars)
B: British Common Law
C: Confederation
D: David Thompson
E: Étienne Cartier (Father of Confederation)
F: First Nations
G: Gold Rushes
H: Hudson Bay Company
I: Insulin
J: John A. MacDonald
K: Kerosene
L: Laurier (Prime Minister)
M: MackenZie King (Prime Minister)
N: Northwest Passage
O: Ottawa
P: Protestantism
Q: Queen Victoria & Elizabeth
R: Rebellions of 1837–1838 and Responsible Government which resulted from them.
S: St. Lawrence River
T: Tommy Douglas
U: Uranium (Mining and development of nuclear technology)
V: Vancouver (explorer)
W: World Wars
X: Camp X (Covert military training facility)
Y: Yukon
Z: /Zed/ (pronunciation)

I ran into several possibilities for several of the letters, so I had to cut some things out. I think that that list gave a very well rounded sample of important people, places, inventions etc from all eras of Canadian history, and all areas of Canada.

One thing I noticed that was consistent with the in class activity was the dropping of many historical names, which I think reflects the importance of certain individual, but also people’s strong interest and admiration for leaders in key periods.

After writing the list, one interesting thing I’ve seen lacking in my own is examples from the 1950s, which was the topic of the original activity, and I’m not quite sure the reason.

I hope you’ve enjoyed this post and look into historically important things to Canada, and connecting it to my learning in class for the last week.

Change and the Storybook Land Canal Boats

Over the course of the last month, we’ve focused on two main topics. Continuity and change, and how they relate to post WW2 Canada and the world. Last week we had a look at an exceptional example of such. That being the rise of Disney, and what it represented to America and the world.

In this process of looking at such, we had an activity. This was to look into a certain Disneyland attraction, and get an idea of what has changed in that single thing over the years. The ride my group focused on was the Storybook Land Canal Boats. In our initial search, we found some information on some of the basic changes to the attraction, such as the addition of “Frozen” themed miniatures to the ride.

But upon digging deeper, we found a more interesting fact about the ride. This being the segregation of the employees by sex who worked at the attraction. Initially, the employees working at the ride were all male, for two primary reasons. The first being more technical, was that the early boats lacked the ability to go in reverse, so had to be manually pulled from the canal at night, which was quite difficult. The second reason, was that Walt Disney though that the cast members/employees were a sort of metaphor for a father telling a fairy tale to his children. Later on, women were slowly allowed to be assigned to the attraction, and oddly enough, there was a period where only women were assigned to work there, until 1995 when it became coed once again.