A Prayer for Owen Meany is a book I was ashamed not to have read. I picked it up several times, started it, and did not continue with it. I've read a great deal of Irving's work, and so my seeming inability to read this particular story I found both embarrassing and puzzling.
So, finally, I just read the damn thing.
And of course I liked it a great deal.
Perhaps most problematic was that I knew too much about the plot and characters prior to reading the novel. Everyone (as in every reader) I know has read it--LOVED IT--has imitated Owen's voice for me--and then has lamented the pain that he/she felt at Owen's untimely death. Sometimes people have even felt the need to tell me where they were when they read the book--as if it was such a seminal, pivotal, profound book that it warranted such remembrance.
Perhaps it was my previous knowledge of the book, then, and my knowledge as to how much it has moved other readers, that caused me to remain so very unmoved as I read the book. I knew Owen would die--of course I did--and not simply because so many people had already told me he died. Irving puts his death out there practically on the first page, and you simply wait out the novel until he finally does die. I knew he would die in a way that the book didn't quite foreshadow (as in in Arizona in an airport bathroom as opposed to in a village in Vietnam). It was the only amount of unpredictability that the book had left to offer.
It seems to me that the worth of Owen Meany lies in how it grapples with the issue of faith and purpose. My problem--I have little faith, and I struggle daily with having purpose. Maybe, then, this should be the book for me. Except I'm too jaded for it to be the book for me. Owen's faith is ... stupid.
Okay. I said it. Stupid! And sure, there are reasons for his unshakeable and fatalistic belief. But I thought his intelligence at odds with this faith. Owen was psychic. I'm not sure why that also makes him a believer.
I did enjoy the novel. But I did not love it like I thought I would; like countless others have said I would. I have never read reviews of the book, and when I did, after finishing it, what a surprise to realize the book was NOT in fact, reviewed well at all! A few A-s... but mostly pans. Interesting. And yet it is considered a modern classic, isn't it? Why did I think this? Can I even count this book toward my Classics goal?
Ah well... I will anyway. One down. 99 to go.
Friday, November 30, 2012
Thursday, November 15, 2012
The Classics Club
I'm somewhat of a school addict. If I could take on as my permanent job that of STUDENT, I would be quite pleased. Being a student is actually similar to being a triathlete in training.
When training, you are working toward something great. You are working toward betterment, toward achievement, toward glory, toward greatness. Your training has a purpose outside of just being a way to keep thin, to keep in shape, to stave off mortality. Being a student is similar. Your reading, writing and insight have purpose when you are taking a class. They are attached to a goal--that of getting a good grade and that of being more articulate, better read and more knowledgeable than Bob who is sitting next to you in class.
A grade--A race. Same idea.
I get to work toward something--and that thing, though contrived, is also real. You really do compete in a race; you really do receive a grade. Once that carrot (the race/the grade) is taken from me, however, my effort seems without purpose--just a silly self-indulgence. Of course, you and I both know that even attached to a race or a grade, training and reading/writing is just as much a form of self indulgence. I'm not out to better the world; I'm out to "better" (read indulge) me. I could get all nihilist on you and explain how since the world is inherently devoid of meaning except that which I ascribe to it, I need these contrivances to get me up in the morning. But that's probably a bit much for 11:00 a.m. on a Wednesday morning.
Anyway. Often in the off season I start hankering for goals. Usually this results in me starting a bunch of big projects that I can't execute properly once my training and racing picks up again. Nevertheless, I can't seem to help myself. This week, after my work and short workouts were done, I spent time building a list of classic literature I want to read in the next five years. I've set goals like this before (that is, to read a set amount of a type of literature in a prescribed period of time), but, as explained earlier, when the goal isn't attached to something outside of me--like a race or a grade--I have trouble sticking with it. But this time... this time I found something--a lovely contrivance to keep me working! I am joining a blogger group called The Classics Club. On it you post a list of the 50+ plus classics you plan to read in the next five years. As you read through the list, you blog about each book. Here is my list.
I did something similar to this in my late 20s. I didn't join a group, but I did make a list of classics I wanted to read. These classics had to have had movie versions made of them, however. I'd finish a classic and then reward myself by viewing the movie. I remember I made Andy watch all the movies with me. At the time I kept a journal of my thoughts--whether the movie did justice to the book, or not. I'll be damned if I can find the journal now, of course. Another awesome project alive only in my brain... and not on paper.
Even when you have written or photographic evidence of a successful project, it still really only exists in your brain as a fragmented and imperfect memory.
I'm posting this in my reading blog, where I will detail my classics reading, and on my tri blog just IN CASE any of you triathletes are also closet classics lovers and want to journey over to Reading It to read about my adventures in Classics reading.
I finished Irving's A Prayer for Owen Meaning this week. Can you believe I hadn't read that one? I know. Me too. I loved it... but honestly I loved Cider House and Garp more. Owen slides into the number 3 spot of best loved Irving books for me. I also just finished Tom Perrotta's The Leftovers. You know, I really did NOT think I would like that one. The premise, that a huge portion of the world population vanishes into apocalyptic air, irritated me. Was this going to be like Left Behind? But I knew Perrotta does not espouse any one particular religious view, so my curiosity was peaked. The novel is more of a character study -- imagining how individuals would respond in the wake of an apocalyptic occurrence.
Okay, triathletes. Enough on books.
Next post will be back to our regularly scheduled programming.
One point five weeks until I begin actual TRAINING again!
When training, you are working toward something great. You are working toward betterment, toward achievement, toward glory, toward greatness. Your training has a purpose outside of just being a way to keep thin, to keep in shape, to stave off mortality. Being a student is similar. Your reading, writing and insight have purpose when you are taking a class. They are attached to a goal--that of getting a good grade and that of being more articulate, better read and more knowledgeable than Bob who is sitting next to you in class.
A grade--A race. Same idea.
I get to work toward something--and that thing, though contrived, is also real. You really do compete in a race; you really do receive a grade. Once that carrot (the race/the grade) is taken from me, however, my effort seems without purpose--just a silly self-indulgence. Of course, you and I both know that even attached to a race or a grade, training and reading/writing is just as much a form of self indulgence. I'm not out to better the world; I'm out to "better" (read indulge) me. I could get all nihilist on you and explain how since the world is inherently devoid of meaning except that which I ascribe to it, I need these contrivances to get me up in the morning. But that's probably a bit much for 11:00 a.m. on a Wednesday morning.
Anyway. Often in the off season I start hankering for goals. Usually this results in me starting a bunch of big projects that I can't execute properly once my training and racing picks up again. Nevertheless, I can't seem to help myself. This week, after my work and short workouts were done, I spent time building a list of classic literature I want to read in the next five years. I've set goals like this before (that is, to read a set amount of a type of literature in a prescribed period of time), but, as explained earlier, when the goal isn't attached to something outside of me--like a race or a grade--I have trouble sticking with it. But this time... this time I found something--a lovely contrivance to keep me working! I am joining a blogger group called The Classics Club. On it you post a list of the 50+ plus classics you plan to read in the next five years. As you read through the list, you blog about each book. Here is my list.
I did something similar to this in my late 20s. I didn't join a group, but I did make a list of classics I wanted to read. These classics had to have had movie versions made of them, however. I'd finish a classic and then reward myself by viewing the movie. I remember I made Andy watch all the movies with me. At the time I kept a journal of my thoughts--whether the movie did justice to the book, or not. I'll be damned if I can find the journal now, of course. Another awesome project alive only in my brain... and not on paper.
Even when you have written or photographic evidence of a successful project, it still really only exists in your brain as a fragmented and imperfect memory.
I'm posting this in my reading blog, where I will detail my classics reading, and on my tri blog just IN CASE any of you triathletes are also closet classics lovers and want to journey over to Reading It to read about my adventures in Classics reading.
I finished Irving's A Prayer for Owen Meaning this week. Can you believe I hadn't read that one? I know. Me too. I loved it... but honestly I loved Cider House and Garp more. Owen slides into the number 3 spot of best loved Irving books for me. I also just finished Tom Perrotta's The Leftovers. You know, I really did NOT think I would like that one. The premise, that a huge portion of the world population vanishes into apocalyptic air, irritated me. Was this going to be like Left Behind? But I knew Perrotta does not espouse any one particular religious view, so my curiosity was peaked. The novel is more of a character study -- imagining how individuals would respond in the wake of an apocalyptic occurrence.
Okay, triathletes. Enough on books.
Next post will be back to our regularly scheduled programming.
One point five weeks until I begin actual TRAINING again!
My Classics Book List
I've read several of these before. My rule is that I cannot have read the book within the last 20 years.
- A Backward Glance, Edith Wharton
- Ghost Stories, Edith Wharton
- The Warden, Anthony Trollope
- Barchester Towers, Anthony Trollope
- First Love, Ivan Turgenev
- Slaughterhouse Five, Kurt Vonnegut
- Agnes Grey, Anne Bronte
- The Grapes of Wrath, John Steinbeck
- Lady Audley's Secret, Mary Elizabeth Braddon
- Villette, Charlotte Bronte
- The Good Earth, Pearl Buck
- The Woman in White, Wilkie Collins
- Bleak House, Charles Dickens
- Little Dorrit, Charles Dickens
- Nicholas Nickelby, Charles Dickens
- Hard Times, Charles Dickens
- The Fountainhead, Ayn Rand
- Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand
- Clarissa, Samuel Richardson
- Housekeeping, Marilynne Robinson
- The Satanic Verses, Salman Rushdie
- The Mysteries of Udolpho, Anne Radcliffe
- The Brothers Karamazov, Fyodor Dostoevesky
- Crime and Punishment, Fyodor Dostoevesky
- Excellent Women, Barbara Pym
- The Bell Jar, Sylvia Plath
- The Journals of Sylvia Plath, Sylvia Plath
- Sister Carrie, Theodore Dreiser
- Daniel Deronda, George Eliot
- Castle Rackrent, Maria Edgeworth
- The Mill on the Floss, George Eliot
- Lolita, Vladimir Nabokov
- North and South, Elizabeth Gaskell
- Fidelity, Susan Glaspell
- Brighton Rock, Graham Greene
- The Heart of the Matter, Graham Greene
- Far from The Madding Crowd, Thomas Hardy
- Lady Chatterly's Lover, D.H. Lawrence
- The Turn of the Screw, Henry James
- The Aspern Papers, Henry James
- Portrait of a Lady, Henry James
- The Wings of the Dove, Henry James
- Catch 22, Joseph Heller
- The Man in the Iron Mask, Alexandre Dumas
- East of Eden, John Steinbeck
- A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius, David Eggers
- The Stand, Stephen King
- Tropic of Cancer, Henry Miller
- The Haunting of Hill House, Shirley Jackson
- A Walker in the City, Alfred Kazin
- Memories of a Catholic Girlhood, Mary McCarthy
- Stop-Time, Frank Conroy
- One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Ken Kesey
Monday, November 8, 2010
Qualfying for Kona by Raymond Britt
Raymond Britt is an age group triathlete who has competed in 29 IM races, including several races at Kona. In Qualfying for Kona he describes what he did to qualify for the big race, and then he desribes what you need to know (in his opinion) to race well at Kona.The book is autobiographical. Britt draws from his own experience, and assumes that his success can be replicated by your average Joe triathlete. This premise is faulty, and so his book falls short in its claim that it can tell you just what to do to qualify. Perhaps more problematic, however, is that Britt qualified for Kona in the early 2000s, when qualifying for Kona was not nearly as competitive as it is today. Case in point, he qualified for the first time at IMLP in 2002, where he completed the race in 10:33. This earned him 13th place in his AG division of M40-44. Compare that to 2010. In M40-44 in 2010, the13th position went to Vinu Malik, who finished more than a half hour faster than Britt in 10:05, a time which did NOT get him a Kona slot, by the way. With his 10:33, Britt would have placed 29th in his AG in 2010, which is a far, far cry from a Kona qualification. The book should be more aptly called Qualifying for Kona in 2002 than simply Qualifying for Kona.
Before Britt became a triathlete, he was a runner, and a good one. He poo-poos his running achievement as average, but the truth is he is/was capable of running a sub three-hour marathon. I'm sorry, but your average Joe triathlete does not have the kind of run speed in his back pocket. Britt really glosses over this. If he can do it so can you! But he doesn't quite get at how you can do it... he only gets at how HE did it, which was simply to log a few miles and race quite a bit, apparently. If it were so easy, we would all be running sub-3 hour marathons, now wouldn't we?
His approach to success was/is to race frequently, but to do fewer than the average amount of commonly prescribed hours in training. He reprints his rather rudimentary logs of training so you can see just how few hours he actually did to prepare for most of his races. Not surprisingly, the times he increased his training hours corresponded with his fastest race times.
I don't mean to be thoughtless and mean in dissing Britt's book. It's quite a nice little autobiography of a man and his racing history. It does not in any way instruct one on how to qualify for Kona, however, and in that way it is a disappointment.
The Rules of Survival by Nancy Werlin
Still, it wasn't a completely satisfying read because the characters were not fully developed.I didn't quite understand what made the mother so crazy. I wished for more explanation on that. She was off her rocker but didn't have an identifiable mental illness. The kids weren't colorful enough either--just kids trying to survive.
I did like that Matt, the protagonist (the oldest child) comes to understand that he, like his mother, is capable of great evil. This is something Werlin explores in her writing; that even children have the capacity to commit horrid acts. Humans are also capable of great goodness (as witnessed in the character of Murdoch, who helps the kids), but most humans need a significant push to do great goodness, and spend most of their lives complacent.
This is a very quick read. We get a taste of these characters, and then the story ends. It's a page turner, but ultimately not complex enough in its plot or character development to warrant high marks.
Friday, October 1, 2010
The Piano Teacher by Janice Y.K. Lee
The Piano Teacher is written as a dual narrative: one storyline takes place in Hong Kong during World War II, and the other takes place roughly ten years later in 1951. I've never read a novel that takes place in Hong Kong at those times. In fact, I've read few novels (actually none that I can think of) that take place in Hong Kong at all.This is one of the reasons I was first drawn to the book. That--and also that it looked sort of juicy--a war-time mystery with deception and affairs involved. Yum.
Lee is a writer who is good with evoking setting. I could feel the oppressive heat of Hong Kong during the summer months, I could picture and feel the bustle of the streets, the beauty of the beaches. Later, when the war starts, she really captures the gruesome chaos of the "outside" and the barren desolation of the English prison camp.
The story begins with Claire, a newly married Englishwoman come to Hong Kong with her husband. She takes a job as a piano teacher in the home of a wealthy Chinese family, the Chens. I assume the novel is called The Piano Teacher because it is in part about the transformation of Claire after she moves to Hong Kong, from a dependent, naive woman, to a freed woman--a woman who has escaped the bounds of her small life and becomes worldly and independent. The story, in my mind, however, was REALLY about Will, the man with whom Claire has an affair.
Will serves as the connection to Lee's other narrative, which takes place ten years earlier. At that time, Will moves to Hong Kong as a young man, and falls for the experienced and wordly, vivacious and uncapturable Trudy, a beautiful half Portugese, half Chinese socialite who constantly parties and has a somewhat suspect past.. Trudy is just an amazing character. She is what really makes the novel worth reading, I think.Claire's story is really secondary to the Will/Trudy story. Certainly the Will/Trudy story is more compelling.
I could go into an anaylsis here--propose the idea that Claire's fall from innocence mirrors that of Will's--and that Trudy embodies the fallen from the get-go.. But I won't. I will say that I found the story of Trudy and Will moving and absorbing. I also learned a lot about Hong Kong during the time that it was colonized by the English, and about what happened to/in Hong Kong during WWII. I was less interested in Claire's story, though it provided an interesting glimpse at Hong Kong 10 years after the horror of WWII.
I gave the book an 8.5. Definitely worth a read.
Racing Weight: A Review
(originally published 11/09).
I had a lovely Thanksgiving with my extremely large family (we're talking over 25 and not everyone was there). It was a pleasant ruckus. I can only tolerate the Thanksgiving ruckus for a few hours at a time, however, and then I need to escape to my chambers and read for a bit before re-emerging in all of my extroverted glory. This Thanksgiving I chose to spend my get-away-reading time with Matt Fitzgerald's text Racing Weight.
In case you were wondering, it's not a good idea to read a book about achieving Race Weight when you are in the midst of digesting a gigantic slice of dark chocolate cake slathered in peanut butter sauce. You already knew this, of course. I'm the only dumb fuck who would read such a book on Thanksgiving Day.
It is a good book. A wise book. A moderate book in which Fitzgerald uses all of the latest research to highlight the advantages of achieving race weight for one's specific sport, and then ways one can safely do this without losing muscle, without becoming a carb-starved bitch, and without becoming homicidal with hunger. (Okay, he really only covered the part about not losing muscle.)
Much of what he discusses is counter-intuitive. For example, "using a sports drink in training may preserve muscle mass and promote a slightly leaner body composition." Or, you might be interested to know, one can help to optimize her muscle-to-fat ratio by eating protein/carb combo immediately following exercise, because fat burning increases while the carbs you take in are delivered to your muscles to replenish glycogen stores. (143) The book is full of helpful little snatches of race weight know-how such as these facts.
I especially enjoyed the section on supplements. I'm planning on upping my intake of calcium and also trying beta-alanine and conjugated linoleic acid. Has anyone had any experience taking the latter two? Beta-alanine is an amino acid that formulates an antioxidant in your body that supposedly helps fight muscle fatigue and increases lean muscle mass. CLA (the conjugated etc...) has been shown to help fight seasonal weight gain (not as in off-season--as in winter season). Taking adequate amounts of calcium reduces the production of a hormone that aids in fat storage. (236-241) It think it's safe and maybe smart to give these three supplements a shot. And has anyone out there tried taking creatine? I'm not planning on taking it, but I'm curious what your experience has been with it if you have.
It's a good read, and one I recommend even if you could give a hoot about achieving "ideal" race weight. It's more a book about how to eat to fuel for your life as an athlete than a book on how to get thin. Still, don't read it on Thanksgiving. I hate to admit it, but after reading it I feel monstrously large and I just want to cleanse myself by eating only greens, fruit smoothies with whey protein, and lean meats for the next year.
Before I sign off I want to give a LOUD CONGRATS to Kim (Teta Equals Booby) who competed in IM Cozumel today. SHE. KICKED. ASS. 12:22--which is a gigantic PR. Also competing was Claire (Speedy) who also had a fantastic race and a PR, finishing in 12 hours flat. I'm so excited for both of them, because they both deserved to have awesome races and they did.
I had a lovely Thanksgiving with my extremely large family (we're talking over 25 and not everyone was there). It was a pleasant ruckus. I can only tolerate the Thanksgiving ruckus for a few hours at a time, however, and then I need to escape to my chambers and read for a bit before re-emerging in all of my extroverted glory. This Thanksgiving I chose to spend my get-away-reading time with Matt Fitzgerald's text Racing Weight.
In case you were wondering, it's not a good idea to read a book about achieving Race Weight when you are in the midst of digesting a gigantic slice of dark chocolate cake slathered in peanut butter sauce. You already knew this, of course. I'm the only dumb fuck who would read such a book on Thanksgiving Day.
It is a good book. A wise book. A moderate book in which Fitzgerald uses all of the latest research to highlight the advantages of achieving race weight for one's specific sport, and then ways one can safely do this without losing muscle, without becoming a carb-starved bitch, and without becoming homicidal with hunger. (Okay, he really only covered the part about not losing muscle.)
Much of what he discusses is counter-intuitive. For example, "using a sports drink in training may preserve muscle mass and promote a slightly leaner body composition." Or, you might be interested to know, one can help to optimize her muscle-to-fat ratio by eating protein/carb combo immediately following exercise, because fat burning increases while the carbs you take in are delivered to your muscles to replenish glycogen stores. (143) The book is full of helpful little snatches of race weight know-how such as these facts.
I especially enjoyed the section on supplements. I'm planning on upping my intake of calcium and also trying beta-alanine and conjugated linoleic acid. Has anyone had any experience taking the latter two? Beta-alanine is an amino acid that formulates an antioxidant in your body that supposedly helps fight muscle fatigue and increases lean muscle mass. CLA (the conjugated etc...) has been shown to help fight seasonal weight gain (not as in off-season--as in winter season). Taking adequate amounts of calcium reduces the production of a hormone that aids in fat storage. (236-241) It think it's safe and maybe smart to give these three supplements a shot. And has anyone out there tried taking creatine? I'm not planning on taking it, but I'm curious what your experience has been with it if you have.
It's a good read, and one I recommend even if you could give a hoot about achieving "ideal" race weight. It's more a book about how to eat to fuel for your life as an athlete than a book on how to get thin. Still, don't read it on Thanksgiving. I hate to admit it, but after reading it I feel monstrously large and I just want to cleanse myself by eating only greens, fruit smoothies with whey protein, and lean meats for the next year.
Before I sign off I want to give a LOUD CONGRATS to Kim (Teta Equals Booby) who competed in IM Cozumel today. SHE. KICKED. ASS. 12:22--which is a gigantic PR. Also competing was Claire (Speedy) who also had a fantastic race and a PR, finishing in 12 hours flat. I'm so excited for both of them, because they both deserved to have awesome races and they did.
The Talent Code by Coyle and Its Implication for Triathlon Training
I'm reading the The Talent Code by Daniel Coyle. Its premise really isn't novel. The gist is that when we focus deeply on something, when we repeatedly work at it, when we throw our passion into it, we can excel in our chosen domain at an accelerated pace.
Of course.
Still, the book has me thinking. It's causing me to acknowledge and question my deeply-rooted beliefs about talent, intelligence and skill.
For example, I consider my husband very intelligent. I believe he is superior to me in this intelligence, and that I could never match his perfect GREs, his undergraduate degrees in physics and religion (the two of which combined illustrate the range of his interests/ability), his doctorate from Harvard, his thorough knowledge of pretty much everything from A-Z.
In short, he is smart.
He is smarter than me.
Or take Ange. Ange is a killer athlete, and she always has been. When we were tykes she dominated the swimming pool. Dominated. In high school she did cross-country and track, and though they weren't her focus, she dominated there as well. When in college she swam Division I, and domintated there, and when she graduated she ran her first marathon with limited training and she qualified for Boston on this first time out.
She is a natural. gifted.
She is more gifted than me.
BUT.
What if Andy is intelligent and Ange is a killer athlete because from day one they have viewed themselves as intelligent and an athlete respectively, and therefore put in the time--the focused practice--to achieve this?
According to this book what happens is this:
I didn't do that.
Or with Ange. She got the signal she was an athlete early on. She worked at it. and worked at it. and worked at it. She myleinated when doing the fly, when running on the track. Ange is really strong, and when you look at her you think, Wow, she inherited a seriously athletic build. But then you look at her parents. They are small. PETITE. Ange's mom is smaller than me, and that's saying something. Her genes didn't make her strong--I don't think, anyway. It was the signal she gave to her body from a young age. Develop here. Move here. Myelinate now. Her body and mind adapted to her vision of herself, to her constant deep practice.
It's interesting to watch my kids in this light. Jordan loves to draw. And she's good. I always thought this was a gift. She inherited the "art" gene, I'd say. Now I see that she is good because she spends so much time in deep practice. She can spend hours drawing a flower. She draws it again and again until she gets it right. She's making myelin, and it's wrapping around nerve fibers so that each time she draws that flower, she does it with greater ease, accuracy and skill. Conversely, Jordan is not creating much myelin around playing soccer. On the soccer field she is somewhere else. She chats with her friends; she looks at her feet. She follows the ball but doesn't get into the action. This isn't because she isn't an athlete. If it were up to genes, she certainly would be a soccer player. Her father and uncle are awesome at the game. But she hasn't gone into deep practice around soccer. She likes soccer. But she doesn't love it. Until she develops passion for it, until she goes outside each morning to work on it, until she gets some myelin wrapping going on in soccer land, she won't achieve it.
What does this all mean?
The cool thing about myelin is that it can grow throughout your lifetime. It grows with greater speed and efficiency when you are younger, but it grows as an adult nevertheless.
What this says to me is that I need to stop believing there is a ceiling for my achievement. The thing is, I have to WANT that achievement, so much so that I meditatively hone its various parts, so much so that I practice deeply at it for years. I could learn physics. Do I want to? Well, yes. But not so much that I am willing to focus on it the way I have, say, focused on triathlon.
We can't change our genes.
But that doesn't matter. We have more power over our abilities than we have been led to believe.
Of course.
Stil
Publish Post
- On a conscious level I know that any skill can be honed by working at it.
- On an unconscious level I believe that some people pick up skills more quickly than others, and this is a pre-determined, genetic thing.
- On a conscious level I know that intelligence is worked at; that those people who read, study, and practice are the ones who gain knowledge most quickly and thoroughly, and are the ones who excel at taking standardized tests and landing A's in school.
- On an unconscious level I believe that intelligence is inherited. Some people are smart; some people aren't, and there isn't much you can do to change that.
- On a conscious level I believe that I can train my body to excel at whatever I decide is worthy of such a pursuit.
- On an unconscious level I believe there are born athletes and born troopers, and that I am a trooper, devoid of inherited athletic prowess.
For example, I consider my husband very intelligent. I believe he is superior to me in this intelligence, and that I could never match his perfect GREs, his undergraduate degrees in physics and religion (the two of which combined illustrate the range of his interests/ability), his doctorate from Harvard, his thorough knowledge of pretty much everything from A-Z.
In short, he is smart.
He is smarter than me.
Or take Ange. Ange is a killer athlete, and she always has been. When we were tykes she dominated the swimming pool. Dominated. In high school she did cross-country and track, and though they weren't her focus, she dominated there as well. When in college she swam Division I, and domintated there, and when she graduated she ran her first marathon with limited training and she qualified for Boston on this first time out.
She is a natural. gifted.
She is more gifted than me.
BUT.
What if Andy is intelligent and Ange is a killer athlete because from day one they have viewed themselves as intelligent and an athlete respectively, and therefore put in the time--the focused practice--to achieve this?
According to this book what happens is this:
- You have a vision of yourself inspired by something--like watching Tiger Woods on TV, or seeing someone perform Fur Elise on the piano who is your same age, or whatever--and you decide: I want that for me.
- You go into deep practice. You don't just practice; you get into this meditative state where you slow things down and divide the skill into its various parts, memorize each part through constant repetition, and then emerge, skill born. Your learning is accelerated exponentially when you achieve this focused state.
- You develop passion. You want this thing for yourself and you continually go into deep practice to achieve it. You have a vision of yourself that is long term. You are a STUDENT. You are a SWIMMER. You are a PIANIST. This vision sustains you and you aren't deterred from your mission.
- As you enter this state, the focused learning state, the myelin in your brain wraps tightly around the ignited nerve fibers, insulating them and allowing electric impulses to travel more speedily and smoothly. The more the skill is practiced, the more myelin wraps around the nerve fiber, and the more rote the skill becomes. So it's all about myelin. Apparently when they dissected Einstein's brain there was a shitload of myelin in there. At the time they didn't know why. Now they do. He myelinated--like incessantly.
I didn't do that.
Or with Ange. She got the signal she was an athlete early on. She worked at it. and worked at it. and worked at it. She myleinated when doing the fly, when running on the track. Ange is really strong, and when you look at her you think, Wow, she inherited a seriously athletic build. But then you look at her parents. They are small. PETITE. Ange's mom is smaller than me, and that's saying something. Her genes didn't make her strong--I don't think, anyway. It was the signal she gave to her body from a young age. Develop here. Move here. Myelinate now. Her body and mind adapted to her vision of herself, to her constant deep practice.
It's interesting to watch my kids in this light. Jordan loves to draw. And she's good. I always thought this was a gift. She inherited the "art" gene, I'd say. Now I see that she is good because she spends so much time in deep practice. She can spend hours drawing a flower. She draws it again and again until she gets it right. She's making myelin, and it's wrapping around nerve fibers so that each time she draws that flower, she does it with greater ease, accuracy and skill. Conversely, Jordan is not creating much myelin around playing soccer. On the soccer field she is somewhere else. She chats with her friends; she looks at her feet. She follows the ball but doesn't get into the action. This isn't because she isn't an athlete. If it were up to genes, she certainly would be a soccer player. Her father and uncle are awesome at the game. But she hasn't gone into deep practice around soccer. She likes soccer. But she doesn't love it. Until she develops passion for it, until she goes outside each morning to work on it, until she gets some myelin wrapping going on in soccer land, she won't achieve it.
What does this all mean?
The cool thing about myelin is that it can grow throughout your lifetime. It grows with greater speed and efficiency when you are younger, but it grows as an adult nevertheless.
What this says to me is that I need to stop believing there is a ceiling for my achievement. The thing is, I have to WANT that achievement, so much so that I meditatively hone its various parts, so much so that I practice deeply at it for years. I could learn physics. Do I want to? Well, yes. But not so much that I am willing to focus on it the way I have, say, focused on triathlon.
We can't change our genes.
But that doesn't matter. We have more power over our abilities than we have been led to believe.
Looking To Write A Few More Chapters
Recently I read Dara Torres' biography, Age is Just A Number. My friend Liz wrote the book and maybe it's for that reason I liked it so much. I like Liz, of course, but she is also a fantastic writer. For those of you who have read the book, I know it reads in the first person. That makes Liz's feat in writing it even more impressive, doesn't it?
Anyway. You should all read it because, like me, many of you are parents, no longer spring chickens, and mature enough to truly appreciate being an athlete. Many of you are also old enough to remember when Torres went to her first Olympics at age 15, and then her second, and her third, and her fourth, and most recently, her fifth, at age 41. The names I associate with Torres--Tracey Caulkins, Rowdy Gaines, Steve Lundquist (I had magazine cut-outs of him all over my high school bedroom walls), Matt Biondi, Janet Evans--all retired years and years and years ago. (You must admit Lundquist was rather smoking. I felt the need to travel down memory lane here...)
And yet here is Torres. She is not only still a force, still unbelievably strong, still winning. She has actually improved at every Olympics in which she's competed. In 2008 she won her first individual silver medal in the 50 meter freestyle--and she was just shy of taking the gold by 1/100th of a second.
And she was 41.
And she is a mom.
And no, Ted, I really DON'T believe she doped.
In the past I've felt that speed and endurance are wasted on the young. They take speed for granted, use it nonchalantly, view it as a given. The younger athlete is pissed when his speed or endurance fail him and he doesn't win, or place, or beat the old dude out there. The older athlete, on the other hand, expects his speed and endurance will fail him. He doesn't expect to win anymore--or even place, except, perhaps, in his age group. He doesn't expect to beat the young dude with the attitude and the lean body.
But I'm not sure exactly WHY this is true. It certainly hasn't been true in my case. I was a fairly good swimmer in my high school years, but I am a better swimmer now--at least in terms of endurance swimming. Further, in high school and college I couldn't run at all, and I considered it an amazing success that in my mid-20s I completed my first marathon in around 4:10. Just recently I took 51 minutes off that marathon time--and I'm not nearly as proud of that accomplishment as I am of that first 4:10, which seemed positively miraculous at the time. At any rate, I wouldn't want my current self to compete against my young self. Mentally and physically my seasoned older self would kick the shit out of my self as a girl.
And it's not just me who has improved with age. Do you know the average age of the top two women runners at this year's NYC marathon? 39.5. In fact, every one of the women in the top five at NY this year was over 32; the average age for the five being 36. And did you note that the gold in the last Olympic marathon went to Constantina Tomescu-Dita, who happens to be a 38-year-old mom? And this year at Kona, every one of the women in the top ten was over 30, with the singular exception of Mirinda Carfrae, who is 28. DeDe Greisbauer has been in the top 10 at Kona for the last several years running, and this year she celebrated her 39th b-day. Even among we non-professionals I can cite examples of the older athlete kicking the younger athlete's ass. My friend Alina, a state champion in her high school years in multiple events, is now bettering the times she posted back then, and she's nearly 40. My friend Melissa, too, keeps getting better with age. She has PRed over and over again this season, and she's been competing as a runner all 44 years of her life.
Dara Torres, via Liz, put it this way:
Lifestyle, not genetics, is the primary reason older athletes tend to slow down. Most people as they reach their thirties, place more priority on their jobs and families, as well they should. But as a result they downgrade their workout goals from achieving personal bests to staying in shape. This might be the right decision for many. This might even by the right decision for you. But if you still have athletic ambitions, if you still want to compete and win, there's no reason you have to give up. Your body can still perform if you put in the effort--if you still do that 10 mile run or that long, hard quality set. You just need to be smarter about training and more time-efficient. But chances are, if you're an older athlete, you're smarter and more time-efficient anyway.
If you guessed that this whole post is just a pep talk to myself about the fact that I'm entering a new AG next year, you are right.
But it's a good pep talk. Because the more I look, the more I find examples of how peak performance often doesn't occur until our later years. The most competitive age group in triathlon is NOT 20-29, as one might guess. Often people ask if I'm excited to move into the 40-44 age group, since presumably the competition will not be so fierce. But, in fact, the 40-44ers are MORE competitive than the 35-39ers. I will actually have to improve my performance next season if I want to continue placing well in my age group.
Sometimes I find myself wistfully looking back. So many of the big chapters of my life seem finished. When you are growing up (as a girl, anyway) you often wonder about the mysteries life holds for your future: who will I marry? What will I be? How many kids will I have? Where will I settle down to live? You don't think of questions beyond those chapters. It's as if those chapters are the only chapters. Certainly when young you don't ponder when you will start your second, or third career, marriage, family, or home. You don't think about whether you will enjoy a comfortable retirement. You simply don't imagine the later chapters in life. It's hard to even fathom what they are. I think this is why 40 seems so ominous, so mortifying, so well, OLD. We haven't imagined the chapters after 40--and so it seems that the book must end when we get there.
But now I'm trying--trying very hard to embrace that over 40 holds incredible possibility, because I have no idea what chapters have still to be written. Life certainly isn't over. It's called MID-life because one is half way there.
And isn't it usually the second half of the race that holds all of the meaning and excitement--pain and joy? Isn't that where the shit really happens? Isn't that where the ones who have not given up show their stuff and pass all of the young bucks?
Anyway. You should all read it because, like me, many of you are parents, no longer spring chickens, and mature enough to truly appreciate being an athlete. Many of you are also old enough to remember when Torres went to her first Olympics at age 15, and then her second, and her third, and her fourth, and most recently, her fifth, at age 41. The names I associate with Torres--Tracey Caulkins, Rowdy Gaines, Steve Lundquist (I had magazine cut-outs of him all over my high school bedroom walls), Matt Biondi, Janet Evans--all retired years and years and years ago. (You must admit Lundquist was rather smoking. I felt the need to travel down memory lane here...)
And she was 41.
And she is a mom.
And no, Ted, I really DON'T believe she doped.
In the past I've felt that speed and endurance are wasted on the young. They take speed for granted, use it nonchalantly, view it as a given. The younger athlete is pissed when his speed or endurance fail him and he doesn't win, or place, or beat the old dude out there. The older athlete, on the other hand, expects his speed and endurance will fail him. He doesn't expect to win anymore--or even place, except, perhaps, in his age group. He doesn't expect to beat the young dude with the attitude and the lean body.
But I'm not sure exactly WHY this is true. It certainly hasn't been true in my case. I was a fairly good swimmer in my high school years, but I am a better swimmer now--at least in terms of endurance swimming. Further, in high school and college I couldn't run at all, and I considered it an amazing success that in my mid-20s I completed my first marathon in around 4:10. Just recently I took 51 minutes off that marathon time--and I'm not nearly as proud of that accomplishment as I am of that first 4:10, which seemed positively miraculous at the time. At any rate, I wouldn't want my current self to compete against my young self. Mentally and physically my seasoned older self would kick the shit out of my self as a girl.
And it's not just me who has improved with age. Do you know the average age of the top two women runners at this year's NYC marathon? 39.5. In fact, every one of the women in the top five at NY this year was over 32; the average age for the five being 36. And did you note that the gold in the last Olympic marathon went to Constantina Tomescu-Dita, who happens to be a 38-year-old mom? And this year at Kona, every one of the women in the top ten was over 30, with the singular exception of Mirinda Carfrae, who is 28. DeDe Greisbauer has been in the top 10 at Kona for the last several years running, and this year she celebrated her 39th b-day. Even among we non-professionals I can cite examples of the older athlete kicking the younger athlete's ass. My friend Alina, a state champion in her high school years in multiple events, is now bettering the times she posted back then, and she's nearly 40. My friend Melissa, too, keeps getting better with age. She has PRed over and over again this season, and she's been competing as a runner all 44 years of her life.
Dara Torres, via Liz, put it this way:
Lifestyle, not genetics, is the primary reason older athletes tend to slow down. Most people as they reach their thirties, place more priority on their jobs and families, as well they should. But as a result they downgrade their workout goals from achieving personal bests to staying in shape. This might be the right decision for many. This might even by the right decision for you. But if you still have athletic ambitions, if you still want to compete and win, there's no reason you have to give up. Your body can still perform if you put in the effort--if you still do that 10 mile run or that long, hard quality set. You just need to be smarter about training and more time-efficient. But chances are, if you're an older athlete, you're smarter and more time-efficient anyway.
If you guessed that this whole post is just a pep talk to myself about the fact that I'm entering a new AG next year, you are right.
But it's a good pep talk. Because the more I look, the more I find examples of how peak performance often doesn't occur until our later years. The most competitive age group in triathlon is NOT 20-29, as one might guess. Often people ask if I'm excited to move into the 40-44 age group, since presumably the competition will not be so fierce. But, in fact, the 40-44ers are MORE competitive than the 35-39ers. I will actually have to improve my performance next season if I want to continue placing well in my age group.
Sometimes I find myself wistfully looking back. So many of the big chapters of my life seem finished. When you are growing up (as a girl, anyway) you often wonder about the mysteries life holds for your future: who will I marry? What will I be? How many kids will I have? Where will I settle down to live? You don't think of questions beyond those chapters. It's as if those chapters are the only chapters. Certainly when young you don't ponder when you will start your second, or third career, marriage, family, or home. You don't think about whether you will enjoy a comfortable retirement. You simply don't imagine the later chapters in life. It's hard to even fathom what they are. I think this is why 40 seems so ominous, so mortifying, so well, OLD. We haven't imagined the chapters after 40--and so it seems that the book must end when we get there.
But now I'm trying--trying very hard to embrace that over 40 holds incredible possibility, because I have no idea what chapters have still to be written. Life certainly isn't over. It's called MID-life because one is half way there.
And isn't it usually the second half of the race that holds all of the meaning and excitement--pain and joy? Isn't that where the shit really happens? Isn't that where the ones who have not given up show their stuff and pass all of the young bucks?
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Review. The Time-Crunched Cyclist. Fit, Fast and Powerful in 6 Hours a Week by Chris Carmichael and Jim Rutberg
But ummm... on second thought, six hours is not exactly nothing.
IN fact, six hours is sort of kind of .... a lot.
I rarely ride six hours a week on the bike unless I am training for something long like a half or full Ironman. Carmichael is not addressing his book to triathletes, though. He is talking to bike people, and in that context six hours isn't much, I suppose. If you are only biking and maybe doing a few plyometric exercises, six hours might actually be downright doable.
For that reason alone I would recommend this book to "the time-crunched cyclist". I would also recommend it to the time-crunched triathlete, and also the non-time-crunched cyclist or triathlete who is interested in whether he/she could actually get away with doing a lot less than he/she is currently doing. (Yep. That would be me.)
The book is well-written. The prosy parts flow, and the more conceptual parts are presented simply, articulately and without pretention. I can slog my way through just about anything if I think there might be a granule of worthiness buried within its pages. I didn't have to with this one. I read it from first page to last and I found it refreshingly enjoyable to read. It was also a relatively quick read, which I thought fitting since the book IS addressing an audience of time-crunched folks and all.
But on to what the book actually had to say.
It said this:
If you want to be really fast and fit and powerful on the bike you only need to spend six hours a week on it.
Then he tells you how to achieve this.
Here's how.
Intervals just below threshold and intervals just above threshold. Lots of 'em--and not much else.
Carmichael makes it clear that this type of fit and fast and powerful is a only a superficial layer of fit and fast and powerful. It's like a nice coat of shellac atop an otherwise lusterless pet rock. (Okay... maybe you didn't make pet rocks with your kids this week. Shellac is so cool. I love shellac.) Okay then... His program works much like a toupee, or a heavily padded bra, or a spritz of perfume when you really need a shower. It gets the job done on a superficial level, but dig deeper and you come up hairless, or flat, or smelly. Are any of these comparisons working for you? I didn't think so. Oh well.
Stated differently:
Apparently you can go through a season using his program and actually do very very well, but the program is not something you can do over and over again and get the same initial, WOW--look what I did on six hours a week effect you did the first time through. I'm not sure exactly why this is true. I think it may be like drug use. The initial hits are pretty potent, but after awhile your body is like, whatever. Give me more or I won't give you want you want. I need that bike floating through my veins, Man. (That is a bizarre image.)
At core, Carmichael is still of the more is more and more is better and more means you are more fit and fast camp. But if you have no time, like basically everyone in the free world who has a job, a family, or a really time-consuming internet life that needs to be tended to pretty much 24/7--or all three--there are short-cuts to winning that cat 5 crit, and these short-cuts can work if you execute them just so.
I really appreciated Carmichael's section on using a power meter. I've digested quite a few books on using the data a power meter provides, and this was the most straight-forward, easy-to-understand rendition of the basic concepts I have read.. He also has sections on maximizing what you've got when racing (there are a few good tips in there), a section on nutrition, a section in which he describes a few essential strength/plyometric exercises to do (even if you are time-crunched) and a section on how to incorporate more endurance miles into the program if you suddenly find yourself with time on your hands--which would likely not happen, of course, unless you got laid off or divorced or something of that nature. But those things happen, so you never know, right?
I am not time-crunched. After struggling through a mid-life crisis of Herculean proportions, I rebuilt my life so that I have the time to do the workouts and the races I want to do. Hence, I can do things the "right" way, which is to say I make sure I log my fair share of endurance miles.However, Carmichael's program has me intrigued. What about the triathlete who has a great base because of years of endurance work, but who needs to shake things up because of boredom? Or the girl who has just finished an IM , but still wants to race well and fast for the rest of the season? Could one apply this program to that situation? No more hugely long rides for a bit--just intervals balanced with significant rest for six weeks?
The program's application in this light got me completely fired up. Instead of the Time-Crunched Cyclist, the title could be The Burnt-Out Endurance Cyclist: How to Add Zip to your Endurance Diet (even if it is for only six-eight weeks).
Carmichael comes across in this book as a wise, measured and experienced coach. He made me trust him. That's saying something since I had previously believed he is a money-making tycoon who is out to exploit his coaching relationship with Lance to sell books. He still may be just that, but he is also a good writer (assuming he wrote the book and not a ghost writer) and a clear thinker. I dig clear-thinking writers. So he's in. You should read this one. I give it very high marks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)