Why?

At what point in history did walking lose its status alongside cycling and other less physically demanding forms of transport as an acceptable means of traveling over long distances? I ask because I've been struck by the number of times people have responded to news that I'm planning to walk from Kyoto to Tokyo with a simple "Why?"

This reaction would seem to be based on the assumption that no-one in their right mind would consider walking such a vast distance unless there was some ulterior motive, such as raising money for some charity or raising awareness of some issue. If I said I was planning to cycle between Kyoto and Tokyo, people might still question the wisdom of such a venture, but they would accept that it's something someone might do for its own sake, because they enjoy cycling and the particular opportunities and encounters it offers.

To me, walking offers all the benefits of cycling and then some. A month or so ago when I wandered out into the country to see how far I could walk in a morning, I followed a route I used to cycle fairly regularly in my youth. What struck me, besides the number of new houses on the hills between Cashmere and the Hoon Hay Valley, was how much more in touch I felt with my surroundings compared to when I cycled the same route. The faster you go, the more you miss.

With so many efficient and comfortable transportation options available to travelers these days and with most of us having so little time to spare, it's only natural, I suppose, that the more physically demanding and time-consuming alternatives become less and less desirable. But in our haste to get from point A to point B, perhaps we're missing out on all kinds of opportunities for adventure along the way.

Yes, Erik and I could make roughly the same journey along the Nakasendo between Kyoto and Tokyo using trains and buses, but the experience would be totally different. That's why I'm walking.

Distance walked today: 0km
Total distance walked since blog began: 78.4km