US Open: Day 6

Wow. Even for a tennis ignorant such as myself, the US Open is pretty spectacular. We had day tickets for Louis Armstrong, which guaranteed us good seats in Armstrong and seats in Grandstand and all of the minor courts. Tickets for Arthur Ashe were incredibly hard/impossible to get, but the other matches were spectacular. Essentially, I saw parts of 8 different matches, mens and women's singles and doubles. It was really fun, especially the Murray/Melzer match.

The first two matches at Louis Armstrong were rather lackluster. The first was Sam Querrey of the US upsetting Ivo Karlovic of Croatia, the 14th seed. We only stayed for part of the first set, which was boring because neither players broke serve and...it was just uninteresting overall. Querrey beat Karlovic in straight sets, and by the score, it didn't look like either one broke serve in the first two sets. Maybe it was too early in the day to generate much excitement. I must say that it was the first time in two months that I have woken up before 11, much less at 8:15 AM. We only stayed half an hour into this match and went to watch some women's doubles at 11:30. Querrey went on to make the 4th round without us in attendance.

Then came a second round match of the Chinese women's doubles contingent of Zi Yan/Jie Zheng (seeded 8th), who thoroughly trounced the European team of Lucie Safarova/Mara Santangelo. The Chinese placed the ball extraordinarily well, and the Europeans really didn't have a chance. Safarova crumbled a bit under pressure, and she double faulted several times. There were a lot of Chinese supporters at this match, but they failed to make any noise at all until it was clear that their team would win without any effort. In contrast, we were surrounded by Europeans of different nationalities, all of which screamed "Brava!" and other such Italian phrases as well as conversing in Parisian French.

Then we watched the men's doubles match of Igor Kunitsyn/Dmitry Tursunov and Simon Aspelin/Julian Knowle, who were ranked 6th. We didn't even stay for an entire set in this match, but the ranked team was pretty hot. In particular, Aspelin was hot until he started playing. Needless to say, they were upset in three sets. After this match, we caught a few minutes of Amelie Mauresmo(32) vs Julie Coin. Unseeded Coin suddenly found herself a celebrity after beating top-ranked Ana Ivanovic in the second round on Thursday. This match against Mauresmo, a former #1, was highly anticipated. It turned out to be uninteresting as Mauresmo beat her fellow Frenchwoman in straight sets, 6-4, 6-4. There wasn't anything noticeable about this game except that Mauresmo does look very manly in her uberbuffness. The far more interesting women's singles match was Nadia Petrova (19) vs. Flavia Pennetta (16). That was a thrilling three-setter, which we caught the end of. Both women just pound the ball across the court, but they look graceful while doing it. Pennetta won the first set, lost the second, but persevered in the third. In the third set, it looked as if Petrova was suffering from a toe injury. Both Petrova and Pennetta did very well in 2008 and led undistinguished careers previous to this year. They were pretty fun to watch. As their game stretched on, more people came to the court just like us. We had to wait a while because there's supposed to be no movement allowed when the ball is in play, especially in the players' line of sight while serving. In Armstrong, we had seats directly in the line of sight, so getting up wasn't possible until each break.

The third match in Armstrong, Gael Monfils (32) vs. David Nalbandian (7), was also lackluster at best. Monfils is an up and coming French star, but his playing style is very awkward. His movements are rather jerky, and he looks like he doesn't know where to put his body sometimes. And his sneakers squeak abominably. Monfils is fun to watch because he does little dances and he's a bit flamboyant. He doesn't have the intense look of murderous concentration that seems to be stamped on every other tennis player's face. In his last match, his racket went flying into where the photographers were sitting and he got stuck on the divider while trying to retrieve it. Monfils pulled off a straight-set win over Nalbandian, but it was a boring game. My tennis friend claimed that both players were very out of shape, and Nalbandian had a belly. I'm not sure about the second point, but both Monfils and Nalbandian did not look particularly good on the court compared to the other matches. Even Querrey and Karlovic, while dull, looked smooth. Monfils essentially steamrolled over Nalbandian, 6-3, 6-4, 6-2.

The two amazing matches of the day were Murray/Melzer and Ferrer/Nishikori. These are two instances where watching on TV is incomparable to watching live action. I'm going to wax poetic about my love of sports again, but these two long, grueling games really embody the determination and beauty of tennis, and sports in general. Melzer and Nishikori (as underdogs), fought unbelievably and bravely. In Melzer's case, he played the last two sets through cramps and extreme pain. Nishikori, ranked 126 in the world, lost his composure a bit in the third and fourth sets, but heroically rallied himself and managed to outplay 4th ranked Ferrer in the fifth set. I don't usually cheer for the underdogs, but both gave superhuman efforts. Even though Melzer didn't pull off the mindblowing upset that Nishikori did, he still deserves a lot of credit for pounding Murray during the first three sets and almost wrapping up the match.

Next stop: Wimbledon.

the human condition

On a horizontally challenged roommate:
YJJ: She doesn't like vegetables and only eats fruits, chicken, and turkey.
ME: That sounds pretty healthy to me.
YJJ: I had some blueberries and peaches that I needed to get rid of before this trip, so I offered them to her. She said that she only ate fruit in muffins or tarts.
ME: It all makes sense now.

YJJ: Last week, our apartment got hit by lightening.
YJJ: The only thing that got hit was the TiVo, which got fried. My roommate spent a whole day in front of the TV trying to reprogram it. It's my first time using TiVo, but apparently it records 20 hours on high quality.
YJJ: I was like, "That's pretty great." My roommate freaked out and told me that 20 hours was less than two days worth of TV watching for her. She told me to please use the lower quality option so she could get 80 hours.
ME: ...

A conversation with my physically young but old-at-heart friend who staunchfastly refuses to be labelled as a pessimist and insists on being called Uncle Sam at the tender age of 20. I'm afraid I can't do that, son.

PT: I just realized that you came to Austin after your sophmore year, right?
ME: Yes.
PT: Ah blast. Now I'm old and probably jaded like you too. This is miserable.
ME: Thanks for that lovely picture of myself. If it makes you feel any better, you were always old and slightly jaded.
PT: What?! Bollox.
I was young and filled with ambitious wonderment.
I was like that one song.
I was like yesterday in that beatles song.

PT: I'm trying to figure out if lunch with a co-worker might be kind of strange.
ME: Why?
PT: Well, I don't think I want to engage in small talk right now, but serious business may not reflect well on me. Er...as in talk about what's on my mind right now, which is pretty much politics and school and tie colors.
ME: tie colors?
PT: Yeah, that isn't really on my mind. But it's a cool line.

ME: Tell your mom I said hi.
PT: No, you can tell her yourself.
ME: I want to post some of this on my blog.
PT: Solid.
ME: My god, you sound like a cross between a beatle, king arthur, and a surfer dude.
PT: The crustacean?
Or the British rock group?
Are beatles crustacean?
ME: Um.
PT: Don't think so.

ME: I love how you bash the Olympics because I loved them.
PT: Yeah, the Olympics really bothered me this time around, like inordinately bothered me. Even when I wasn't thinking about them. I hardly watched any as a result. China sucks a nut.
ME: Dude.
PT: I really hope they forfeit the gymnastics gold.
ME: There's no way in hell they're going to forfeit the gold. Plus, no one really gives a crap anymore except you.
PT: ...and the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th place teams? It's just the temerity of it. The whole thing is just a propoganda fest. Sure, that's most Olympics.
ME: Well, yeah.
PT: But this is just egregious.
ME: that's the point.
PT: ...
ME: Or would you prefer something like Athens?
PT: Some place where the Olympics are less an end than a means. This competition just felt like let's make a big show, let's get golds and everything nice on paper.
ME: But it made people watch and appreciate sport. That I do admire the Chinese for.
PT: Seriously, without Michael Phelps, this would have been a sham. Michael Phelps made the Olympics. Him and basketball, I guess.
ME: Yeah.
PT: Michael Phelps got relegated to a pargraph on page 19 of Chinese newspapers.
ME: Well, the Chinese have huge issues with swimming. If it were up to them, they wouldn't even include swimming in the Olympics.
PT: Haha. Or any track aside from hurdles. And even then, they might have found some reason to cancel them.
ME: They'd just have diving, gymnastics, ping pong, and weight lifting.
PT: Weight lifting is just cruel. The way they go to farm villages, pick some plumpy girl out.
ME: You're such a purist.
PT: I'm telling you.
ME: Damn, I would have been picked if I were in China.
PT: I'm not jaded, I'm disappointed.
ME: I don't know why you keep on denying the fact that you're a pessimist.
PT: I'm not a pessimist! I think London is going to be cool.
ME: You appreciate minimalism.
PT: Already they're using the Olympics as an opportunity to uplift some of the slum areas.
ME: Don't worry. The Brits will be toned down.
PT: It's not just the ostentatiousness.
I love big, I love grand.
It's the callousness.
It's the brazen, we're host, so we can pull shit and you can sit down and shut up.
ME: But people didn't shut up.
PT: Yeah they did, the protesters?
ME: There were a lot of articles about the gymnasts and crap.
PT: That's horrific.
ME: It's China.
PT: News articles won't amount to anything. Indeed it is.
ME: How can you expect them to do anything different?
PT: I'm not a pessimist. Hah. Anyway, my mom's stomach grumbles.
ME: You should go. tell her I said HI. PLEASE?
PT: Sure, why not. Call me Uncle Sam in your blog.
ME: Ok.
PT: Deal. Shake and I'm out.
ME: Shake. Man hug. Shoulder slap.
PT: PELVIC THRUST!
gone

The Running Count: Novels

Loved:
Atonement... Ian McEwan
An Equal Music... Vikram Seth
Running with Scissors... Augusten Burroughs
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close... Jonathan Safran Foer
Rebecca... Daphne du Maurier

Enjoyed:
Perfume... Patrick Suskind
Dr. Futurity... Philip K. Dick
Ubik... Philip K. Dick
The Chosen... Chaim Potok
Love in the Time of Cholera... Gabriel Marquez
The Kite Runner... Khaled Hosseini

Ambivalent:
The Shipping News... Annie Proulx

Pointless:
The Lady and the Unicorn... Tracy Chevalier

Disliked:
God of Small Things... Arundhati Roy
The Master and Margarita... Mikhail Bulgakov
Grotesque... Natsuo Kirino

The Running Count: Movies

Loved:
V for Vendetta
WALL-E
Gone Baby Gone
Crash

Enjoyed:
Casablanca
The General
Lucky # Slevin
The Visitor
The Diving Bell and the Butterfly
American Psycho
Inside I'm Dancing

Fun but little added value:
Definitely, Maybe
Empire of the Sun
Equilibrium
10 Things I Hate about You

Indifferent to:
The Dark Knight
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang
Ladyhawke
Fried Green Tomatoes
In the Valley of Elah
Mirrormask
Persepolis

Better off not watching:
Die Hard
Pan's Labyrinth
The Incredible Hulk
Wanted
Mona Lisa Smile
Encounters at the End of the World
Transsiberian

Ian McEwan's Genius

Generally, if a novel takes me two days to finish, it's pretty good. Having to pause several times because of information overload has become the high point of my reading. My only regret is that I saw Atonement before actually reading the book, which spoiled some of its effect. When I saw the movie, the lushness of the scenery and the wealth of emotion and talent was really amazing. But it's all nothing compared to the book. I would have loved to read the book without knowing the plot and some of the driving forces, but it was still amazing.

The entire book is very organic. The plot is important, but what's much more important are the characters and the picture of humanity that they present. McEwan delves deeply into the psyche of his characters, their weaknesses and penchant for seeing things through tinted spheres, sometimes disaster. He's able to capture awkwardness, hope, love, and wanting all at once. It's very difficult to write beautiful scenes between awkward people. Everything is so real and vivid. His characters are more four dimensional than three dimensional, with a clear sense of time.

Much of McEwan's virtuosity lies in his spotless transition between characters and through time. Everything gently rolls along, like one wave pushing itself continuously and constantly towards the shore. Even when the passages seem rambling, each sentence is carefully weighed and set down inexorably in its surrounding cocoon of prose. However, what McEwan really excells at is his command of the English language. His descriptions take on emotions of their own: lush and languid, or crisp and terse. The first half of the book is prodigious in its sheer depiction of the richness and decay of the English countryside, and by extension, English culture. The second half has some of the best descriptions of war that I've ever read. I know that many critics have commented on the realism that McEwan endows onto his wounded soldiers and civilians, but I seriously had to stop eating when I was reading some parts. McEwan's playing with us here, showing that he can write just as well about men with halves of their faces blown off as carpets of flowers being crushed underfoot and clear mossy lakes.

It's not a coincidence that my two favorite books of this summer are Atonement and An Equal Music. Both books are a study in virtuosity, self-conscious cleverness, a dash of elitism, and an absolute command of the English language. Like An Equal Music, Atonement is almost lyrical in its quality. Unlike Seth, McEwan chooses to economize on his dialogue and relies heavily on exposition. An Equal Music is a much neater package than Atonement, but isn't as gut wrenching.

My only dissatisfaction with Atonement is the character Briony. She's developed extremely well, but so unsympathetic up to the end. This is where seeing the movie first may have seriously biased me while reading the book. For me, Briony never atones and remains cowardly towards the end (I suppose that's what McEwan means to say). Throughout the book, I couldn't even find a shred of sympathy for her. How could she possibly be so unfeeling? I felt that her character was a bit inconsistent. Although she's seriously warped by her fairytale mind, she's not unkind to others and does feel for them. How could she be so selfish and puerile to not even try to remedy what she did? Briony would have been more convincing for me if she had been ten rather than thirteen. I also had the same problem in the movie. What's more, she first leads the people around her into tragedy by utilizing her imagination, then she uses that same imagination as a means of self-expression and fame later in her life. It's a bit hard to stomach and inexcusable (for me).

Fantasy and reality are interwoven in my life at times as well, and that's perhaps why I'm extremely harsh on Briony. Unlike Briony, I can separate it all out and shoulder what blame I do deserve. I cannot believe that she doesn't even understand that she told a lie years after the fact. That's just ridiculous. What really irks me is that Briony doesn't take responsibility in reality and she's somewhat redeemed because she happens to be so good at her fantasy life that she can become a successful novelist. I think that having an overactive imagination is bad even when you don't cause mayhem in other people's lives, because it destroys your own. Refusing to acknowledge reality and letting the imaginary take over is inexcusable, and no atonement will ever suffice.

my last swimming post

It's not my fault that I become obsessed with hot and other-worldly talented men. Christian Bale, the young and talented actor, has temporarily taken a backseat to Aaron Peirsol, the not so young and talented backstroker. It's a bit ironic that Christian Bale happens to be 34 while Aaron Peirsol is 25. Still, I think the former has at least twenty years left in his career and the latter has approximately zero and four if he seriously stretches it to the max. Not everyone can be Jason Lezak.

Still, it's amazing that Peirsol along with Phelps, Crocker, and Hansen are all in their third Olympics. It's even more amazing that Peirsol hasn't lost an international race from 2001-2007. Having actually swum before, what they all do is absolutely amazing. For one, I know that there's no way I'll have a backstroke start like that in my life (even though I thought it was crappy a few posts ago). In sports, age is defined by how long you've been in it and how much potential you have left. I was watching an Al-Jazeera interview featuring Aaron Peirsol (the weirdest thing ever) and all of the technological advancements in sports. The swimmers get tested to death after every race. Peirsol was saying how his body just collapsed after the 4 by 100 medley relay and he got sick. That would explain his absence at the Speedo party (Or the fact that he's endorsed by Nike). I'm pretty sure that Phelps conked out as well later. The levels that athletes push themselves to is insane.

In some way, being a top athlete is almost the complete opposite of being an actor. Obviously, both require natural ability and the right body shape. Once you're on the starting blocks and the buzzer goes off, instinct just takes over. You can think while you're racing, but it's not really recommended. All of that practice goes into a minute or two of forcing your muscles to work harder than they've ever worked. Acting is also instinctual, but the actual process is long and all about development. Also, acting is all about forcing yourself to adopt a different persona. Sports is about reaching down and developing your inherent ability. After all, we can't change our bodies.

Back to Aaron Peirsol, he along with everyone else on the US team genuinely seem like nice guys. I've read several articles complaining about the lack of trash-talk in swimming today and a wish to be back in the Gary Hall Jr. days. Personally, I think it's great how Phelps gives his teammates credit, Peirsol gives Lochte credit, etc. In his interviews, Peirsol sounds semi-intelligent, super chill, and like a nice guy. He sounds much older than 25, is involved in non-profit organizations, and seems like a loyal friend (to Brendan Hansen, at least). I enjoyed watching clips of the ENCORE fundraiser meet that UT put on a few years back. It's hilarious, especially the two 'funny' events, the 100IM and 50 breast-back.



What's really sad is that Ian Crocker, who got last in this race with a time of 1:35, beats my best 100IM time. And he did it by jumping into the water, swimming butterfly with one arm, crashing into the lane line repeatedly in backstroke, and not doing a pullout in breaststroke. I guess the only consolation I have is that I can match Peirsol's absurdly slow winning time of 1:17 in the 100 free. At the Olympics, it's not clear that the swimmers are going that fast since they're in a 50M pool. In this short-course 25M pool, breastrokers and butterfliers take about 5 strokes to go from end to end (when they're deathly serious and not going for laughs). Backstrokers and freestylers take about 10. It's mind-boggling how fast these human dolphins are.



To understand this video, David Cromwell swims backstroke and actually beat Peirsol in the 100 back earlier in this meet, and he's challenging Brendan Hansen to some made-up event. Cromwell's coach is Eric Shanteau, one of the inspiring stories of Beijing, and Hansen's coach is Peirsol. We have the cross-over back-breast going on here. There's some good natured ribbing and 'trash-talk'. I believe that the ear-slap that Peirsol gave Shanteau at the end relates to the 2004 Athens Kitajima dolphin kick incident, which Cromwell replicated in this event.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKy5TlU8xS8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mIuE7IC0Ok&feature=related

Now that the swimming portion of the Olympics are over, I'm going to very quickly stop caring about all of this. It's inevitable, since no one actually watches the World Championships in swimming and the Olympics only come around once in a very long time. I'll eventually work my way back to Christian Bale movies, because those keep coming.

my swimming trial

I've been so fired up by watching the Olympics that now I visit the pool twice a week rather than twice a month. Today I was inspired to seriously overexert myself. It was my attempt at being a better swimmer, although definitely not an Olympic swimmer by any means.

First of all, the Phelpsian inspiration for me is the turn. His amazing dolphin kick motivated me to pull my own out of the closet (back from the days where I swam butterfly so disastrously). The conclusion: the dolphin kick is stupendously fast and brings me halfway across the pool. Unfortunately, being forced to hold my breath for so long and consequently depriving my muscles of oxygen makes the rest of the lap pretty painful. I could barely swim anything longer than 100M after implementing this new turn. Still, it's pretty cool to go so far underwater (and to feel other swimmers staring at you).

This kick is so gorgeous when you see the underwater cams at races. Swimmers seriously look dolphin-like when they execute it. I don't think I've gotten the fluidity down yet (one hour of swimming probably isn't sufficient), but some turns definitely felt better than others. At the beginning, I was having trouble surfacing because my knees were too bent and my hands weren't sufficiently pointed upwards. Also, I couldn't gauge exactly when to switch to flutter kick and how to transition. Next time, I'll probably not try to go so far on my turns but I'll try to do them better, a bit more in the hips and less in the knees.

After watching numerous swimming clips on youtube (I learn so much from youtube), I realized that my breastroke was somewhat wrong. After pulling, I don't bring my hands back up in a V shape. I also don't think that my pulls are deep enough, but that's something to work on for another day. This was terribly awkward when I tried to fix it. It felt completely wrong the first few times and my thumbs wouldn't behave themselves. Seriously, they tried to detach themselves from the rest of my hand. It did get better, but I still don't think I'm doing it completely correctly. And I'll never know. I'll work on it next time some more.

Something that caught my attention was watching the back-breast turn in the 200IM duing the Olympics. I had to pause and rewind it several times because everyone seemed to be flipping (except for the guy who went old school and lost about three seconds by touching the wall and kicking off). Not only that, I couldn't tell what kind of turn it was. Since turns from backstroke to breastroke were illegal when I was younger, I first thought it was a weird back flip. After some research, I realized it was like a 360 degree sideways spin. After trying twice, I gave up. It's probably like when I tried to do a flip turn for the first time. I'll probably have to spend quite a bit of time contorting and twisting at the wall until I get it.

The stroke that I can't swim is butterfly. I have some not-so-good memories in high school of being asked to swim the 100M butterfly. I was lucky if I could still feel my arms by the beginning of the fourth lap. Lactic acid build-up became a main staple of my vocabulary. The problem is that I never figured out how to do the butterfly properly. I could never get the two kicks in for each stroke or the undulating motion right. It looks so beautiful when done correctly, but I'm sure that my stroke looks pretty ugly. I think I have enough upper-body strength to swim butterfly well if I just get the technique down. Maybe I can ask the lifeguard for some help.

One of my regrets is doing swim team on and off when I was younger. That and not doing an organized sport for the last six years. Inertia is so strong when you sit on your butt all day for years and years at a stretch. At least swimming motivates me much more than the treadmill. I'm pretty hopeless at running (like many of the Olympic swimmers). Unfortunately, that doesn't exactly imply that I'm good at swimming. Still, it's fun to be a recreational swimmer. The other day, another swimmer and I drove out a slower swimmer during circle swimming. It is bad because the slow swimmer was there first, but it's very hard to circle swim in a 25M pool when you have three people swimming at completely different speeds. I'm definitely more motivated to swim now and I'm trying to improve my technique as well. Who knows, I might even learn butterfly one day.

Olympic Devastation

Just as I predicted, Aaron Peirsol lost the 200 backstroke to Ryan Lochte by .39 seconds. In swimming, .39 seconds is pretty substantial. Peirsol has been dethroned as the king of backstroke, a title which he's held for seven years. Maybe dethroned is the wrong word, since he does still hold the world record in the 100 backstroke. Brought down quite a few notches would be more accurate.

Watching Peirsol is always exciting because you never know what's going to happen. Unlike Michael Phelps, who often beats his competition by full seconds, Peirsol never looks like he's going to win until the last ten meters or until he actually touches the wall. As many commentators have stated, 'he just has a knack of putting his hand on the wall first'. Having watched him at the US Nationals and in Athens, you wonder how he does it. Unfortunately, waiting until the last ten meters is not a foolproof method.

Watching the 100M backstroke was pretty amazing because Peirsol had a subpar start, an average turn, and still managed to win by more than half a second. One wonders what he can do if he actually nailed his start and had a better kick off his turn. For Aaron, his advantage is in pure swimming. His strokes are beautiful, and he can power past other swimmers. It's amazing how many tight races he's managed to win with subpar starts and insomniatic turns. Peirsol is still one of the best backstrokers in history, if not the best backstroker ever. However, that might change now that Lochte is making huge strides in his backstroke.

Lochte beat Peirsol in the 200 backstroke at the 2007 Worlds, the first time in seven years that Peirsol had lost a backstroke event in an international competition. That's still impressive. What's not so impressive is that the 200 backstroke is (was) widely considered to be Peirsol's best event. He was always more concerned about the 100 backstroke because mistakes such as a slow start and sluggish turns are much more costly at such a short distance. I would say that the 100 is his signature stroke. Although I'm not inside his head, there have been suggestions that he became much too complacent in the 200 backstroke because the field with the exception of Lochte is far less competitive than the 100 backstroke. If he's able to put so much effort into the 100 backstroke, why can't he put more effort into the 200? Maybe Peirsol choked in the 200. I don't really know. Also, for someone who trains more than three hours a day, couldn't he have worked more on his starts and his turns?

Watching Phelps, his huge advantage is on his turns. Granted, his strokes are near perfect, but it's his dolphin kicks that give him body-length leads on his competitors. Lochte also has very good turns. Maybe I don't have the right to comment, since I can't swim fast enough to participate in the Olympics. However, turns are very tiring and can really drag, especially near the end of the race when fatigue becomes a major factor.

On the subject of turns, I saw a clip of the 2004 Athens 200 backstroke race, where Peirsol won by a hefty 2+ seconds, then got disqualified, then was reinstated as the gold medalist. The judge disqualified him on the last turn. The entire business was very odd since the disqualification was thrown out on the grounds that it wasn't stated in the working language of FINA, or English. From what I could gather, the complaint was that Peirsol had flipped onto his stomach too soon. Since all of his turns are pretty slow, I wasn't sure what was different about this one except that it was even slower than usual. It was a huge controversy because the lane judge was French, Peirsol had made remarks earlier that Kitojima should have been disqualified for illegal dolphin kicks in breaststroke, and on and on. After the mess, the British protested vehemently because their swimmer would've been bumped up from fourth to third and thus in medal standings. It's hard to argue that Sweetman, the British coach, was completely devoid of self interest since the British squad performed more than abysmally that year. This is exactly what the Olympics shouldn't be about, a mish-mash of incompetence, self-interest, and politics. For God's sake, why are there no underwater cameras and instant replays in swimming? I will say that in club swimming, disqualification for gliding on the stomach for the backstroke turn runs rampant. It's happened to my team before. I suppose that if 12 year olds can get disqualified, so can Olympic athletes.

Off the subject of swimming, Peirsol seems like an all-around nice guy from his interviews. He's good friends with Marcus Rogen, who had a gold medal in the 200 back for all of fifteen minutes and openly supported Peirsol, stating that Peirsol is always honest, and won the race. Peirsol's also good friends with Brendan Hansen, who came in second to Kitojima in the breaststroke.

I don't even know why I should care so much. I guess Peirsol appeals to me because backstroke was my event. Unlike him, I peaked at age 8 when I won the Central Jersey championships in the 25 back. Also, I tend to scrape by as well, except that it only works for me 8% of the time, not 98% of the time. It's still nice to follow swimmers like Peirsol, Phelps, and Lochte and to know enough about the sport to appreciate the extreme difficulty in what they do. They've even inspired me to go to the pool twice this week! I know that I'm not an Olympic athlete. I'm not even a moderately fast swimmer. However, I do wish that I hadn't taken so many breaks in swimming when I was younger. There are certain things that you learn in doing sports that can't be learned anywhere else. I've decided that my future kids can skip the math competitions, but they can't skip their swim meets.

The Olympics are inspiring. It's true that all the athletes have immeasurable amounts of natural talent, but they have to train so hard both physically and mentally. I have been knocking Aaron Peirsol for most of this post, but he has trained hard to be the undisputed backstroke champion for seven years. It's pretty extraordinary. The entire US men's swim team is extraordinary. They're all seasoned veterans and have gone through so much. These few days have been such an inspiration to me. I want to work harder and be a better person. At the end of the day, I want to know that I've lived my life proudly, to have done good for others, and to be satisfied with my work.

An Olympic Splash

Michael Phelps does three things in life: Swim, eat, and sleep. I was reading an article in The Guardian today on his amazing carb and protein heavy diet of 12,000 calories per day. It was amusing and the comments were stupid as usual. It's still amazing that he can put away six times as much food as the average male and two times as much as Lance Armstrong. The link is below:

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/food/2008/08/michael_phelps_really_big_brea.html

I was discussing this with a friend yesterday, and we both agreed that the media has ODed on Michael Phelps. Phelpsmania is everywhere. Even without Phelps, the US men's team is exceptionally talented. With the exception of Brendan Hansen, who has had a disappointing year, the rest of the field is exceptionally talented. Although swimming is an individual sport, there's a deep camaderie among the US team that's especially touching. If Michael Phelps didn't exist, his close friend and competitor Ryan Lochte would undoubtedly be the best swimmer in the world and have a larger slew of medals (he already has a generous sized pile) to his name. Apparently Phelps will only take off his earphones in the ready room for one person, Ryan Lochte. Lochte also says that he's gotten Phelps to loosen up outside of the pool (the time left over after 6+ hours of swimming in a day, massive eating, and sleep is unclear).

Still, it's inspiring to see swimmers (even Phelps) as people outside of the pool. Part of the reason is because swimming is a huge college sport in the US and powerhouses such as the University of Texas, Florida, and Auburn churn out top competitors in the sport. The University of Texas story is also pretty darned awesome. Brendan Hansen, Aaron Peirsol, and Ian Crocker are Longhorns. All were part of the winning 4 by 100 Medley relay in Athens, which set a world record. Ironically, Brendan Hansen was beaten in the 200 Breaststroke in the US trials by his teammates, Scott Spann and Eric Shanteau. To make the story even more dramatic, Eric Shanteau revealed that he had testicular cancer but still managed to swim in Beijing.

Although I'm a huge Aaron Peirsol fan, I have to say that Ryan Lochte does deserve some of my admiration for not being afraid to go against Peirsol in the 200 back and Phelps in the 200 IM. At the US trials, Michael Phelps dropped the 200 back in favor of concentrating solely on the 200 IM. He thought that the talent pool in the backstroke was considerable and he had a better shot in the IM. I would be amazed if Lochte beat Peirsol in the 200 back and Phelps in the 200 IM with only a thirty minute interval between the two races. Like most others, I think that Lochte has a good chance of beating Peirsol in the backstroke (They share the world record), but won't have the energy to really be a factor against Phelps. Racing against the best backstroker in the world in his event and the best all-around swimmer in his means that Lochte has to give 120% in both races. I just hope he doesn't kill himself while doing it.

I can't watch the 200 back final because it's just way too intense for me. I'm rooting so heavily for Peirsol that I'm going to be absolutely distraught if he loses (I'm getting a funny feeling that Lochte's going to beat him). Still, even if Lochte beats him, Peirsol will have his gold from the 100 back, a silver in the 200 back, and most probably a gold in the 4 by 100 Medley relay. It will probably be Peirsol's last Olympics. As Ian Thorpe showed us, it's good to quit while you're ahead. Phelps has stated that he would like to swim in London 2012, but won't ever attempt his punishing quest for eight golds again. He said that he was old at 23 and wouldn't train competitively until February of next year.

It's just amazing how young these athletes are. What do they do when their careers end at 25 or 26? Knowing that you peaked and there's still 60 more years to go, what goals do you set? What do you look forward to? How do you go from such a disciplined schedule to nothing at all? I hear that Ian Thorpe is interested in starting his own clothing label. Success can be fleeting, but oh so sweet while it lasts.

Views of the Olympics

Like the UN, the Olympics are an expression of a beautiful idea and a tribute to some of our higher ideals. Unlike the UN, the Olympics come much closer to the goal. Granted, the Beijing 2008 Olympics were almost doomed before its start by sheer politics, something that often derails the best of efforts. China kicked back with an astonishingly well-crafted and beautiful program during the opening ceremonies that stunned viewers in its scope and vision. It's easy to forget China's vast millenia of history, but we were all reminded that morning.

The parade of nations is always so poignant, even if it is long (and grows longer every four years). It drives home the point that we're so different, yet the same. The great thing about sports is that it's the purest form of natural talent. There may not be respect for one another's country, but there's always respect for someone running or swimming beside you. It's just amazing to see athletes from over 200 nations and over 80 heads of state gathered in one place celebrating human achievement.

The Olympics aren't perfect, and certainly doesn't solve anything. Countries still get invaded, nuclear weapons exist, etc. But as long as something fundamental exists that ties people together, we'll survive.

Instead of preparing for office hours, I've spent all of my time drooling over the swimming events. I did see the monumental 4 by 100 relay, and it was beyond spectacular. To put it bluntly, it was a superhuman effort that embodies some of the best in teamwork. His team needed the win, and Lezak rose mightily to the occasion and more. His determination was spectacular, his performance Herculean. The great thing about sports is that it's so primal (you only had to look at his teammates screaming like hyenas) and pushes people to really go beyond their best. It also embodies the beauty of what people can accomplish together.

Then again, people also do shit things when they're together like plotting to take over the world and creating misery for others. Everything's give and take. Also, for every professional athlete, there are ten idiots (not that professional athletes are known to be terribly smart in general). I was reading a BBC article on whether or not Michael Phelps was the greatest Olympian of all time. Of course, the comment board was resounding with nays. The Brits feel that the greatest Olympian is the Brit Steven Redgrave, who won five gold medals in rowing in five consecutive Olympics. Honestly, I don't know if Michael Phelps can be considered the greatest Olympian ever. It's clearly a case of comparing apples to oranges. However, as with any open forum, most of the comments were ridiculous.

First, it was clear that very few people knew anything about swimming. Those were the smart people. Then other people complained about the number of events in swimming and suggested that Carl Lewis could have won more medals if track had created events such as running backwards and flapping your arms as quickly as possible. Frankly, the comparison to swimming is just a bit insulting, even if I am a bit biased as an ex-swimmer. Other dumb comments suggested that Phelps wasn't a worthy Olympic champion because so few people access to swimming facilities. This old school Olympic games aficionado suggested that if you threw everyone in the pool, someone would beat Phelps and further implied that running was the only true sport since everyone could do it. Right...and your national hero Steven Redgrave's sport rowing would certainly be disqualified since it's a lot more exclusive, expensive, and equipment heavy than swimming.

Clearly, it's popular to spout loads of bull on which you know nothing of and sound like a complete idiot. I should try to open my mouth before I formulate reasonable arguments in the future. However terrible most of the British comments were, the American comments were even worse by comparison. A quarter of the comments gloated on France's utter humiliation in the 4 by 100, especially after their incendiary boasts the day before, and three quarters of the comments blasted France for not entering the Iraq war on the side of the Americans. I love how the average American is so ignorant, close-minded, and thinks of everything in terms of politics.

The Olympics are already rife with politics and scandal. For heavens sake, the point is trying to minimize the ill-will and politicking that goes on, not fan the flames. We have enough of it in the real world. Every four years, we try to celebrate human achievement, sportsmanship, and the very best that individuals have to offer. It's a pity that people and countries (ahem, Iran) can't put aside their differences for a few short weeks and see the Olympics for what it should be: pure talent and inspiration.

On a lighter note, the message boards are also full of comments on the runway show that the 200+ nations provided for us. There were mixed comments but admiration for the US team's natty Ralph Lauren attire (sans the logo and the cap). Some people accused the team of being too commercial and not ethnic enough. Personally, I'll pass on the wigs and the stockings. Someone also commented on the Chinese team's terrible yellow and red outfits as egg and tomato soup, which doesn't go well with the team's skin color. I did think that was hilarious. I did like the Chinese women marching before the men, though. Communism does have a few virtues. In all, the Olympics remind us all of our great potential and by the same token, our great mediocrity.

the poet novelist Vikram Seth

An Equal Music reads like a classical work of music. It's compact, lyrical, and precise. I've always had great regard for poet/novelists, one of my favorites being Hermann Hesse. The great thing about having a poet write a novel is that it's going to be of high quality. The diction is astounding, and the flow and structure is generally impeccable. Because the poet is forced to pack so much meaning in so few words, the novelist automatically carries that sense of importance into his work as well.

Vikram Seth's work is well-crafted and beautiful until the last movement where he and his character implodes in an orgy of sentiment and excess. Up until that point, the tempo is well established and much like his main character Michael, Seth is giving a virtuoso performance. Although with an understanding that the book is from Michael, the extremely talented but delicate and unstable musician's point of view, having the book degenerate exactly when Michael does is not very gratifying to the reader. The last part of the book rambles and loses much of its focus. One thing I will say is that Herman Hesse, even more so than Vikram Seth, does ramble and repeat himself in quite a few of his prolific works. However, everything excluding these trouble spots are divine.

Although some reviewers call Michael selfish and a completely unsympathetic character, I don't think that's the case. He's clearly bipolar, as are all of the other musicians in the book. They don't become world-class at their craft by acting normal. Imagine how difficult it is to be normal when your entire life is devoted so completely to one thing and it defines you. One point that Seth makes is that Michael cannot separate his life from his music. All of his emotions and identity are intertwined with music and lost when his music is lost.

I love how Seth portrays the successful musician's life. He gets the balance (or imbalance) of the characters very well. The interaction between Michael and his quartetmates are vivid and just a joy to read. I'd have to say that I didn't care for the Michael-Julia romantic relationship so much, even though it is the base of this novel. The thing is, I find Julia very hard to sympathize with as a character. She's just as selfish as Michael, if even more so. Michael's more extreme, but Julia's not exactly well-balanced herself.

The only thing I can say about Seth is that his writing is perhaps a bit too clever. He's very good at his craft, but the novel is almost impossible to get through without some rudimentary background in music (Not that a music-hater would actually pick up this novel). Seth clearly thinks about every word carefully and places it just so in his novel. The main shocker in this novel is done well and neatly. The only thing I didn't enjoy about this singularly good piece of work is a vague sense of elitism, or Seth thumbing his nose at people who aren't up to his musical standards. Other than that, structuring the first part of the book more loosely or the last part more tightly would have created a truly wonderful book.

It would seem that Vikram Seth wrote this book partially for himself and his own love of music. I completely support that and appreciate all of the heavy research that undoubtedly went into this project. Just by the care that he put into the words, you get a sense of how important music is for him. It's always been a bit of an obsession of mine, but I love artists who really respect what they do and put in bucketloads of effort. I look forward to reading Seth's gargantuan work, A Suitable Boy, sometime in the future.

baleheads

Question: "Are you a Balehead?"
Answer: "What's a Balehead?"

Sadly enough, fans of Christian Bale refer to themselves as baleheads. It's a really strange token of appreciation and slightly off-putting. For me, the word 'balehead' somehow conjures up the word 'buckethead', which implies a random man standing in the middle of an open field with a bucket over his head. Despite the ugly fan-name, Christian Bale is a very talented actor with superhuman levels of intensity and dedication. It doesn't hurt that his face looks perpetually gaunt. Despite all of his talent, my real affection lies in the way that he never smiles in any of his movies (except when he's insane) and has a cute albeit sometimes annoying lishp.

Now that he's on my list, I
a) Watch a bunch of his movies indiscriminately (Maybe not the one with fire-breathing dragons)
b) Read as many online interviews as possible.

a is rather difficult as I will eventually hit a boring movie or movie #7 and lose all of my interest. b is easy since the ratio of articles to original source material is about 10:1, which leaves me with about 3 pages total.

It's a bit sad that celebrities complain about the lack of privacy, but how can you expect the paparazzi not to hound you when your face is projected on thousands of screens every year? Also, people (like me) want to know where the talent comes from. At least, I want to read interviews and look for the bits of genius that translate into a superb analysis of some facet of human behavior. Generally, I like to read interviews rather than watch them, although this isn't quite a problem for Christian Bale, who mainly stays in character (at least in accent) for most of his interviews. Written interviews are generally better because they're heavily edited. I'd rather not see the actor looking and acting entirely like a monkey on Ellen or Oprah. Yes. Art is art and life is life. However, it's hard for me to ever see Kristin Bell in the same light again after seeing her giggle and ditz her way through several face-to-face interviews that were covered with several brightly layered coats of fakeness. Hmmm...I would love to see Christian Bale and Kristen Bell in a movie together (their names sound eerily similar), although given that Christian Bale would probably rather die than appear in a comedy, the chances are virtually nil.

From Christian Bale's interviews, it's clear that he's as serious in person as in his characters. For his roles, he pushes the envelope both mentally and physically. Just a few things I wouldn't do for my job: Eat maggots, fight snakes, lose 60 lbs, gain 60 lbs, etc. I would: stand on top of very tall buildings and jump out of helicopters. He's not the only dedicated actor in Hollywood, but perhaps one of the most extreme. It doesn't hurt that he also sounds semi-intelligent and looks hunky with a face so sharp that it could probably saw through metal. I joked that he's eternally serious because his cheekbones are so sharp that smiling is impossible. All of the fun aside, he's turned out very good performances in American Psycho, Batman Begins, Rescue Dawn, and just about everything else he's been in. Even in movies that suck, Christian Bale pulls through with his singlemindedness.

Sometimes his performances are a bit heavy even for the movie at hand, but he's clearly talented. What impresses me is how young he is and the immense quality and quantity of his work, although underrated until the pivotal Batman series. Even in The Empire of the Sun, Christian Bale did an amazing job at thirteen in a very difficult role. His acting is fully on par with Leonardo DiCaprio's virtuoso turn in What's Eating Gilbert Grape. What differentiates Christian Bale in his roles is that sometimes his characters are really frightening because there isn't any sense of lightness or redemption in them. With Clive Owen and other actors who stray towards darker characters, there's always the quintissential humor to humanize the person and make him not so frightening. Christian Bale gives his characters a rich inner life but not always humanity.

Conclusion: I think I'm a balehead?