Do Marathons Begin with a 3 Command Start?
- originally published Tuesday, January 25 2011 on Going the Distance
Blogging and Jogging to a Happier Place:
"On your mark....
...get set...."
BANG!
Thus began nearly every race in my high school track and field career. Five years of varsity squad training, most of them on the mid distance team. Drill hard. Race smart. Run fast. Simple right?
With the exception of one deplorable season of XC, my races never lasted longer than half a mile.
Now, add 25.6 miles to that. That's a big gap.
My name is Kate Thompson. I am 18 years old. I have just hit the legal age for marathon running (yep, there are laws for that). So I am going to run a marathon. I've registered for, paid my dues to, and gotten a poster of the Pittsburg Marathon. All in attempts to keep myself from backing out.
Let me be clear, if only for my own sake. I am not doing this for an impressive finishing time. I'm not running in honor of anyone. I am being totally and completely selfish. This is for me.
BANG!
Thus began nearly every race in my high school track and field career. Five years of varsity squad training, most of them on the mid distance team. Drill hard. Race smart. Run fast. Simple right?
With the exception of one deplorable season of XC, my races never lasted longer than half a mile.
Now, add 25.6 miles to that. That's a big gap.
My name is Kate Thompson. I am 18 years old. I have just hit the legal age for marathon running (yep, there are laws for that). So I am going to run a marathon. I've registered for, paid my dues to, and gotten a poster of the Pittsburg Marathon. All in attempts to keep myself from backing out.
Let me be clear, if only for my own sake. I am not doing this for an impressive finishing time. I'm not running in honor of anyone. I am being totally and completely selfish. This is for me.
All my years of running I've struggled with love/hate issues of confidence with my body and with my mind. I've wrestled with my weight and tussled with times. So this run- this marathon- is going to be the culmination of my rehab with running. I want to fall back in love with it again. This sport and I are going to have to go through couples therapy if this long distance relationship is going to work.
This is why I began to blog my training experience at http://themile27experiment.blogspot.com/. I’ve documented each step of the journey to mile 27. The "mile 27" stand for physical distance of the marathon, plus the extra distance I think I need to go emotionally to love running again. It’s a personal experiment to see if someone as frustrated by running as an ex-track and field star can learn to take refuge in it again. It’s a call to push my body and my mind passed the finish line. I'm running to teach my-self to stop running away from my doubts and fears, but towards something. Something gold and heavy and about the size of my fist.
So this blog, “Going the Distance: The Mile 27 Experiment,” no only earned me a good grade in my freshman writing class, but acted as a therapeutic way to re-embrace running. To make it more than a chore, a guilt trip, or a way to lose weight. Through my online public journal I have worked out the intimidating fears that loomed heavy over me: the distance, the pain, the portapotties (I've heard pre-race they are the stuff of nightmares). I’ve worked through my doubts, and celebrated my mile stones (like the time I learned to guzzle energy shots on my first 20 miler).
Now, I have a testimony of my struggle towards this enormous goal. I can look back over it all and see how far I’ve already come. And I can share it with anyone who Google searches my name. It’s my story, this blogging experiment. And so far it’s worked: I love my long runs. That on its own is an 1st place achievement. So I feel that even before the marathon begins, I’ve covered a lot of ground.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the first post for my blog "Going the Distance: my Mile 27 experiment." It tracked my journey through training to running the Pittsburgh Marathon. I actually revised the post [several times] for a contest the Marathon is holding for featured runner's stories. I have yet to find out if I will be published or not.
The biggest struggle in fixing this post was the sheer cohesiveness of the piece. I wanted to make it convey more about the significance of the blogging project as a whole. I had a more retrospective view in revision, being now at the final weeks of my training plan. I wanted to add some of that increased perspective as I looked back at the beginning of this journey.
Also, I checked for spelling and grammar. I chose not to include any pictures because this entry is a straight and simple journal. I felt additions might distract and subtract from the meaning of the text.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What a Nightmare!- originally published Friday, March 25 2011 on RCL Blog
As a nation, we pride ourselves upon our values of tolerance and equality.
So it is only natural that Americans have united in bashing UCLA's Alexandra Wallace for her, admittedly, rude and ignorant critique of "Asian" mannerisms. It's easy to point out the flaws in her argument, and perhaps that's why we as a culture were so quick to condemn her.
Allegedly infamous mannerisms that include the terrible sins of bonding with family over shared duties and communicating on those satanic little devices we call phones. Nobody else uses them really, or ever talks too loudly. This behavior is relegated only to those of Oriental appearance and descent.
This controversy has left in its wake an outpouring of angsty You-Tube videos, and other college students sadly and slowly shaking their heads. "Thank you American education,"I heard one of my friends say.
The common thread is that everyone has acknowledged that the judgement Ms. Wallace makes are wrong.
So why are other, more serious, examples of televised ethnocentrism being overlooked?
I'm frankly more concerned the American portrayal of Chinese education. I saw this political commercial play during the Rachel Ray show this past Wednesday, and stopped mid-bite of Dannon Peach Lite Yogurt and Granny Smith apples to turn up the volume.
This commercial (which followed the Morning News, I might add) breeds ignorance and ethnocentrism. Its rhetoric is powerful, and pathos driven- reaching down the shadowy fears kept in bottoms of American hearts and wallets. Logos wise- it's disgusting (see assertions of reasoning above). It's also poorly constructed- note how the wording implies that previous ancient empires also had problems with deficit spending and providing adequate health care.
Don't even get me started on the ethos of this commercial. On television it was aired without translation- the climax is Chinese laughing at the problems of Americans; the audience is purposely kept out of their dialogue. The imagination is allowed- no- encouraged to run wild. It intends to isolate and scare the viewer- a manipulation of American fears against a people who clearly look and speak differently than the conventional middle class WASP.
And this commercial stings!
This advertisement depicts Chinese people as not our fellow global citizens, but our conniving competition. They have been studying our failures, it implies. They have worked since the dawn of history watching for flaws in other great empires (like ours, clearly- we put it up there with the Romans after all) and have been waiting for us to fall. Now the own our debt. They own us. They are the enemy, and a victorious one.
This commercial (which followed the Morning News, I might add) breeds ignorance and ethnocentrism. Its rhetoric is powerful, and pathos driven- reaching down the shadowy fears kept in bottoms of American hearts and wallets. Logos wise- it's disgusting (see assertions of reasoning above). It's also poorly constructed- note how the wording implies that previous ancient empires also had problems with deficit spending and providing adequate health care.
Don't even get me started on the ethos of this commercial. On television it was aired without translation- the climax is Chinese laughing at the problems of Americans; the audience is purposely kept out of their dialogue. The imagination is allowed- no- encouraged to run wild. It intends to isolate and scare the viewer- a manipulation of American fears against a people who clearly look and speak differently than the conventional middle class WASP.
And this commercial stings!
If the belief assessed from this commercial are commonplaces on any grounds, then it's no wonder we have comments like those of Ms. Wallace making head lines. My point is perhaps the uncouth ranting of one beach blond isn't our real concern.
If we condone such ignorance in a more professional form, like this commercial, are we not as bad ourselves?
Would our silence in response to the attitudes in this ad, to much of the world, appear as a quiet agreement?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I chose to rework this particular post because I believe it was one of my most interesting blog pieces. The issues' kairos, regarding each of the videos, played off each other very well. The second reinforced a bias asserted in the first. I bias that I felt needed to be addressed, and frankly tackled to the ground.
So besides screening for grammar, I expanded my evaluation of the videos in the second version of this post. I questioned why we confronted one video but let the other largely unchallenged. I only wish I had an answer that justifies the actions of our entire society. Or that justifies our silence.
I also altered the size and styles of text to direct the eye within a rather long post. These adjustments helped create variation and hold the audience's attention.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Popping Bottles of Pop Music?
- originally published Thursday, February 24 2011 on RCL Blog
Glee's title this week was simple: Alcohol. An avid Glee viewer, I was confused and intrigued. I put off watching the episode to ask about other's reactions.
The glee club performs in the "Blame It on the Alcohol" episode of "Glee." Credit: Adam Rose / FOX
"This episode isn't that good," said my friend Jessie over a plate of Simmons baked veggies and a glass of cranberry juice mixed with gingerale. "It all about" she grimaces "drinking."
I had gathered as much.
I bumped into my roommate Elisa in the hallway:
"Aww I heard it's great," she said turning in the doorway. "The whole club, Mr. Shu- they all get wasted. The songs are all about it- so fun!"
"Guess I'll stay in tonight and live vicariously!" I say and she laughs. "For the singing" I say, "not the drinking."
Neither Elisa nor I drink. I never have had so much as a sip outside the Sunday morning communion line. But this week's Glee episode- so kairotically coincidental considering the major drinking holiday of "State Patty's Day" this weekend- made me wish I did.
I was shocked at first by how, well, fun the show made alcohol sound. Especially for minors. For Glee to glorify underage drinking with giggling party scenes and tipsy live performances- I was taken aback. The actors play high school students- like most of their audience is. It didn’t seem appropriate. And the parties, the games, the making out, the pro-drinking songs and karaoke at bars. None of it seemed a bad- it seemed great.
But when the club went on stage to preform [drunk], and the lead actresses vomited on each other mid-number, the show's tone changed. Perhaps that was the producer's intent all along: to real viewers into the fun of drinking, and then vomit the consequences back up at them. (Forgive the mental image).
So "Alcohol" wasn't a public service announcement, nor did it give underage drinking a thumbs up.
I bumped into my roommate Elisa in the hallway:
"Aww I heard it's great," she said turning in the doorway. "The whole club, Mr. Shu- they all get wasted. The songs are all about it- so fun!"
"Guess I'll stay in tonight and live vicariously!" I say and she laughs. "For the singing" I say, "not the drinking."
Neither Elisa nor I drink. I never have had so much as a sip outside the Sunday morning communion line. But this week's Glee episode- so kairotically coincidental considering the major drinking holiday of "State Patty's Day" this weekend- made me wish I did.
I was shocked at first by how, well, fun the show made alcohol sound. Especially for minors. For Glee to glorify underage drinking with giggling party scenes and tipsy live performances- I was taken aback. The actors play high school students- like most of their audience is. It didn’t seem appropriate. And the parties, the games, the making out, the pro-drinking songs and karaoke at bars. None of it seemed a bad- it seemed great.
But when the club went on stage to preform [drunk], and the lead actresses vomited on each other mid-number, the show's tone changed. Perhaps that was the producer's intent all along: to real viewers into the fun of drinking, and then vomit the consequences back up at them. (Forgive the mental image).
So "Alcohol" wasn't a public service announcement, nor did it give underage drinking a thumbs up.
This week’s Glee did something most public education boards still won't- it acknowledged kids drink and aren't going to stop any time soon.
Mr. Shu acts as more than a scolding teacher, but as a realistic role model. He plays up his ethos (which had taken a dive after some drunk dialing gone public) by telling his students he's not going to drink until their next competition and hopes they won't either. "Consider it part of training before a big sports game," he tells the Glee Club, "so no pregaming for the athletes. And none for you either."
He gives them his phone number, a way to keep them from ever saying they don't have a choice but to drunk drive.
He, and the writers of Glee showed the reality of underage drinking- the consequences and the fun side. But they didn't pretend it doesn't happen or can be "cured." For touching on this touchy subject, I give them a Rachel Berry gold star.
“So what about after the performance?” asks Finn Hudson, the male lead.
Mr. Shu pauses “I’ll buy the sparkling cider.”
“So what about after the performance?” asks Finn Hudson, the male lead.
Mr. Shu pauses “I’ll buy the sparkling cider.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This was one of the few reviews of rhetoric in motion that changed my opinion throughout writing it. I set out ready to attack Glee for it's indulgence in underage drinking dance parties. Granted, I was only half-way through the show. As I wrote I was able to understand my own opinion better, and to understand the significance of what I was writing about. How the ethos of very audience aware producers wouldn't allow them to slip into an alcohol inspired plot plight. There had to be another side.
I like this post because it explores the grey area of the topic. I went through revising it and added more context to both my own narrative and the Glee summary. I considered adding a link in for the promo video, but choose pictures from Fox Glee instead. I couldn't settle for a short clip. I'd want my readers to watch the episode, and like I did, think through it for themselves.
