Race Report: Seattle Firecracker 5k

(posted at The Loop, the blogs over at RunnersWorld.com)

I sort of decided to run this one last-minute, meaning I signed up only a few days before and I didn’t “train” for it, as such. Not that I “train” for runs in particular, or even “train” at all. I just like to run. Although, lately, I have been more purposeful in how I run, specifically, trying to run more often and more slowly. So that’s a kind of training, right? And since I’ve been trying to run more slowly, I decided, again, last minute, to go all-out in this 5k.

But I needed a plan, because I know from experience “all out” lasts about 2 minutes, and then it’s just trying to survive after that. So here’s what I did: I made a play list of songs lasting for a total of about 26 minutes. I ordered them by changes in speed, and my goal was to run at an 8 minute/mile pace during the fast parts, and at 8:30/mile pace during the slow parts.

I have no science to back up this rationale. And honestly, I am nowhere near able to tell how fast I’m running at any given moment. I do have a GPS watch, but at a glance it can be “off” by as much as 2 minutes/mile in either direction. But, for the most part, for me, 8:00/mile is pushing myself nearly to max, and 8:30/mile is pushing harder than my preferred “training” pace. And of course, this was not a flat route, and I didn’t really map the expected paces to the elevation changes, so running by effort was not going to really, accurately, reflect my actual pace.

But who cares. I had a plan and making the plan was kind of fun. There’s world-class runners, elites, and competitors. I am running hobbyist. “Preparing” like this was just another way to enjoy the whole thing.

So the idea was: start off “slow,” and when the music changes, go fast, then “rest,” and then push again. I even made a spreadsheet of all of the times when the songs change. According to my calculations, if all went well, I’d finish somewhere be 25 and 26 minutes, which was just fine with me.

I finished in 24’01”.

According to my chart, I was supposed to finish the first mile in 8’17”. According to my GPS watch, I finished the first mile in 8’11”. I’m sure, for elites, a six second discrepancy can speak volumes. But for a chubby running hobbyist, this was a triumph!

I was supposed to finish the second mile by 16’27”, and my actual time was 15’56”. So this is where I, conveniently, shift from being proud of my number crunching to being proud of my running. Those 25 seconds were gained going up a 100 foot climb over about half a mile.

Finally, that last mile, was supposed to be 24’41”, but was actually 23’25”. Another 51 seconds gained.

Now, like I said, this is not at all scientific, nor even very rigorous, using a GPS watch and a spreadsheet, not accounting for elevation changes, and dodging people at the crowded beginning, and a list of other mitigating factors I’m sure you can come up with. Honestly, this could all be a sort of coincidence—if I crunch enough numbers, I bet I could justify almost any kind of prediction and result.

But as I said above, just doing the planning beforehand was fun, and added an extra dimension to the whole experience.

What a Terribly Written Article

Logged into the internet today (i.e. turned on my monitor) and went to Google News, like you do. Boom, right there, an article from Forbes titled “Facebook’s Email System Does *What* Now?” So I clicked on it with alacrity. (Alacrity™ brand clicking, brought to you today by 5-Hour Energy Drink).

What I read was, to put it plainly, difficult to read. I mean, short of giving you a word-by-word scan of each sentence, it was just hard to parse. Please. Go read it yourself and then hope along with me this man is not a successful novelist.

Not to mention the content he was trying to put across. Did you not bother torturing yourself with his cumbersome use of syntax? I’ll sum up: he claims Facebook is changing e-mail addresses in your cell phone. Balderdash.

I didn’t believe it for a second, so I searched for other, hopefully better written articles. Sure enough, I found another, which said that if you’ve given Facebook permission to sync your contact list with your phone, and if one of your contacts on Facebook did not list an email address on Facebook itself, and was therefore given an @facebook.com address by Facebook, then a bug in the API will indeed have Facebook sync with your phone and change the email address of some of your Facebook contacts.

In other words, that Forbes writer lied by omission. Now, go ahead, call me a fanboi, a Facebook white knight. I know it’s cool to hate on the ‘book and it’s nerdy to say how great the damn thing is. But come on, Forbes, I thought you were about rich people. And rich people are supposed to be smart and educated and stuff. This is not just bad writing, it’s bad journalism.

Or, hey, maybe it is me. Maybe I am too stupid to read Forbes, and what I am calling bad writing is just my own inability to read it. And to read between the lines and glean the truth that the writer left out. Maybe I’m the pot calling the kettle stupid, maybe my own writing is inefficient and misleading.

Whatever the case, the plain truth for us plain folks is: your phone is fine, unless you gave Facebook permission to mess around with it. And if you did that, and you’re rich enough to read Forbes, I don’t know what to tell you. Or how. But I bet you’ll survive this. Go get a 5-Hour Energy Drink, soldier.

The Twin– review on Goodreads

The TwinThe Twin by Gerbrand Bakker

Just finished The Twin, literally minutes ago, and want to get my thoughts down as quickly as possible. Not because I’m so very excited. It’s just that I know I have a problem doing a proper review after a few days have passed, and the truth is I don’t even know what I think of this book right now. Maybe I should let it marinate, but just in case, here goes.

The original title in Dutch is Boven Is Het Stil, which translates roughly to “Above Is Quiet.” I would have liked to have known that, as the novel begins with the main character, Helmer, swapping rooms with his dying father, moving the old man into a room upstairs in the house they share. And then there’s the metaphor for heaven that “Above” suggests… not the heaven of paradise, but the heaven of where dead people go. Helmer is a man who, now in his fifties, is largely defined by the dead—his mother, his twin brother, his soon to be dead father. Not to mention a surfeit of dead animals throughout, which has only now occurred to me, upon reflection. If Helmer is defined by these deaths, and the dead are quiet, then Helmer is quiet too.

Quiet in the sense of silent, and Bakker repeatedly mentions sounds: a buzzing electric clock, a small radio playing jazz… but I don’t recall his making much of barnyard animals sounds, the sheep and chickens and cows. Helmer has no voice, can’t express his desires, doesn’t even know what his desires may be. His best hoping at finding desire at all is in putting a map on the wall of his bedroom.

And quiet in the sense of still, in that Helmer is unmoving, frozen by the deaths of those around him. At the moment when he would have become his own person, going off into the world to make himself into whatever he could, his brother dies, forcing him to return to the farm and take up the role his brother would have taken. Not exactly a square peg in a round hole, but nevertheless not the life he might have led, and certainly not the son his father would have chosen.

But this is not a maudlin story, a tale of tragedy and bitterness and regret. It’s sad, yes, the kind of sad you accept because that’s the way of life. Bakker, in Colmer’s translation, is gentle, simple, contemplative, without being barren or terse or merely laconic. Dutch winters are cold without being harsh, and spring is just another season, without being lush or refreshing. Sheep give birth to lambs, and some of them are stillborn—that’s the way of things.

This is a book that is rich with symbols and images, and plenty of opportunity for any given reader to bring as much as he or she wants to a reading. What do you make of the two donkeys, the television set, the binoculars, the broken bicycle, the windmill… I could go on. I mean this as only high praise, that this is a book that will be read and taught and examined and cherished.

Or, take it as it stands—a simple story about a sad man.

View all my reviews

Machine Man– review on Goodreads

Machine Man (online serial)Machine Man by Max Barry

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

In my reviews of Barry’s Jennifer Government and Company, I called his style “a bit stark, a bit plain, matter-of-fact.” Here in Machine Man, the narration is in first person, so this same style comes across as slightly autistic (or as if the narrator has Asperger’s, for those who insist on term for the popular understanding of socially functional autism). Perhaps a bit of a stereotype for lab engineer, but then Barry doesn’t seem interested in bogging down his novel in superfluous details, so why should his narrator. And that’s not just a quip on my part—at one point, his character stops even going home, choosing to live at work instead. This doesn’t have much to do with the story; it’s as much a convenience for the author and the reader as it is for the character.

What we have here is Flowers for Algernon by way of Frankenstein by way of Robocop. And while my personal critical point of view has never been of the historical variety, I can’t help but think how Barry’s novel changes how I see each of those other texts. Or even a story like that laughable movie Limitless (which I just found out was based on a book, so maybe I’ll add it my to-read list, if only for yet another perspective on this type of tale). Combine the basic Greek tragedy, with its heroes and hubris and falls from grace, but attach a good-old-fashioned self-made man story at the beginning. That the main character in Machine Man is literally self-made is even more compelling.

Again, I’m drawn to a more historical analysis than anything else. The self-made-man story is very much an American ideal, and thus it begs the question if Machine Man (or Flowers or Frank or Robo) is a cautionary tale about where the United States is heading. Certainly in these times of economic struggle, it’s looking more and more like “The Great Experiment” has run its course and we’re all doomed to become Canadians. But then I can’t think of a time when we didn’t say we were struggling with a difficult economy, so this is, like those Greek tragedies, a timeless story.

That’s reading way too much into it, of course, and this is supposed to be a review, not a sophomore essay. Fine. I thought Jennifer Government was clever and Company exploited a sense of irony, but here in Machine Man Barry trades in those forces to instead write something a little more human, which itself is ironic given what the main character goes through, not mention clever. And he achieves it, as I said above, within a very matter-of-fact style of narration, holding us emotionally at arm’s length which nevertheless makes us feel even more for the main character. His flaws are our own.

A magnum opus, then? Not quite. I think Barry’s got chops, and I think his greatest work is still to come. And if nothing else, reading Machine Man will lend that much more perspective to his other work. Max Barry is still building himself, and I’m looking forward to the results.

View all my reviews