For the context let us go to the beginning. I was chilling out in a café one day when I bumped into Z. We talked for a bit, and then he said he was going to meet a mutual friend, D, whom I had not seen in 20 years. Naturally I was eager to see him. When Z told me that D had driven over, I finished my drink, and walked over to his car. Along the way the café owner gave me a rugby tackle. Turns out I had forgotten to settle my bill. Well how stupid of me.
Anyway, after a nice chat (even though most of it was recounting all the stupid schoolboy pranks we used to play on each other while we were on the same school bus) we agreed to meet again. On the second meeting, D’s girlfriend – call her N asked me if I wanted to be set up on a blind date. I was a little hesitant, especially after she added the qualifier that my blind date would not be particularly good looking. But she was a nurse. I know that I have a friend out there whose ears would be pricking up when talking about a nurse.
Problem was that Z was there that night and that was the first time that he found out that I was going to be set up on a blind date instead of him - this in spite of the fact that D and him were supposed to be closer friends than D and I. I couldn’t understand it very much. D told me that it was because I was a non-Christian, and she was one too. It was fishy, but I didn’t ask him too many questions. Later on, N would tell me that it was because of a chance remark that I made, that gave her the impression that I would be nice to my girlfriends. But I probably didn’t really mean that, or I meant it as a joke. Well, what’s done is done, and I also want to add that Z, even though he’s always struck me as a nice person, has always seemed a little immature to me. He’s a school teacher but he doesn’t see anything wrong in confessing that he thinks that his Sec 2 class monitor is a chiobu. That is a little shocking.
There were a few mix-ups along the way. D SMSed me on Wednesday and asked me if Sunday afternoon was OK. I said, “ya” and for some strange reason did not hear anything until Saturday. On Saturday, I went out without my handphone, and found that D had made 8 unsuccessful attempts to call me on my hp. So I called him back and I found that that blind date was still on. Finally it was confirmed on Sunday.
I think it was only on Saturday night that it dawned on me that I could be meeting somebody who might change my destiny. But I don’t know. My gut feeling told me that it wasn’t going to work out. On Saturday night, I had a dream. In the first part, I was in a place that closely resembled Napa valley, one of the places I had travelled to in Cali last year. It was a wine country, good for growing grapes. Probably a happy place. A marathon was going on. They are usually happy occasions, at the start, at least. I remembered that my half marathon was a happy occasion. The full marathon was not so happy but yet gave me a greater sense of achievement. People were cheering loudly. But suddenly I remembered that I wasn’t going to do any more marathons, so I got into a car and drove away, at that time passing by quite a few hordes of people. Long distance running was part of my past, not my future.
It’s interesting that this dream took place in the USA. Is the USA a part of my past or part of my future? Nothing was concluded. Later on, I was wandering through a hot and hazy landscape at night, I walked into an old decaying HDB 3 room flat. There was a piano, and then a middle aged Chinese woman who looked like she was quite pretty when she was young (think Mitsuko Uchida). I was intrigued. She said that she taught Grade 8, which was around my level of piano playing. Then I sat down for my lesson with her. Something was wrong when she said that they were going to start with sight reading. Sight reading is the one thing I sucked at while learning piano, primarily because I rely very heavily on my own ears when playing. Once I am familiar with a piece, I basically memorise it and play it from memory, I hardly ever read scores. Then she took a score I had never seen before, came up to me from behind and set it in front of me. This was eerie, because that’s the way they do it when you go in for a piano exam. I looked back nervously at the bench, there were 2 people sitting there - a Chinese woman, and a black man. Later on, I reckoned this was symbolic: most of my piano teachers had been Chinese women, and most of my music heroes have been black men. I tried to sight read - it was an abject performance. Later on, a gust of wind blew, it grew chilly, and a candle was blown out - so much like a classic Chinese Ghost Story movie that you half expected Tsui Hark to appear out of nowhere and yell “cut!” It wasn’t that they were scary ghosts, and it wasn’t scary (though eerie) but it was my brain trying to tell me - these people are ghosts - get it?
I woke up the next morning around noon. I got an SMS from D telling me that he was sick and therefore it would only be the 3 of us. He asked me how I was feeling, and I told him, “if we like each other we like each other and if we don’t we don’t”. Although this was not a bad attitude to have, it was also blase, and he may have detected that I didn’t have high hopes for a blind date. (Who does anyway?) I was a little disappointed that he wasn’t going to be around but I didn’t want to prejudge whether this was a good or a bad thing. If she wasn’t pretty we’ll see about her other qualities.
So I had time to burn until 4. Should I read a book? But I figured that if I were to read a book and shake leg in McD’s in front of a tub of coke (the soft drink not the drug), it would make me nervous and jittery. I hadn’t done any running that weekend so I thought I would go swimming, which I did.
I got there half an hour early, to grab a quick bite at Chippy’s - I got fish and chips. We were to meet at Gloria Jeans. They were late. That was OK, I suppose. A woman’s got a right to be a little late. But how much of a right? OK, N appeared first, and then later on my blind date - call her S - appeared. I tried not to hide my disappointment. She wasn’t the bubbly lively sort. She was actually quite dour.
I had a checklist of what I wanted. (Mofo pls take note). Could I chat with her? Could we exchange views on what we wanted to say? I don’t know. She didn’t seem to be a great reader of books. Was she lively? I had to take into account that she had just done a night shift, so she was sleepy. Whose idea was this? Was she enthusiastic about this being a date? I couldn’t tell.
I ordered drinks for all. This was Gloria Jean’s and drinks were a little steep but I had already resigned myself to buying the first round of drinks, so that was OK. OK, S was a nurse in surgery, so we could talk about a few things. But I did let slip that my sis did complain that some of her nurses did ask a few stupid questions, so I don’t know if that remark pissed her off. But I also wanted to see if she saw the funny side of it or would hold it against me. I couldn’t tell.
Then we went on to other things. They asked me if I played sports. I said - OK, I’m no sports man but I did some long distance running before, I swim, I play a bit of basketball. She said, “I dun even know if I can do my 2.4 anymore.” Sorry, this wasn’t what I was looking for. I made the discovery that you only found the energy to do a lot of things in your own time if you set aside time to keep fit. And anyway sporty girls are usually better in bed. If nothing else they have better bodies.
I was like, “God, please please please give me an excuse - any excuse at all - to like you” There was a slight flash of anger when I found that they were talking about dinner and I probably had to get through a longer period of time with her.
Kind and good people - generally speaking - are not lazy people. Why? For the simple reason that it takes effort to be kind and good. There are people out there who maintain an agreeable facade when they are in front of people, never do anything offensive. Never talk very much about themselves. People who don’t do very much to try to make the world a better place. I’ve seen people who are like that in social gatherings, and are OK when you’re with them in that environment, but they treat their boyfriends or husbands abominably. Why? When you’re not pro-active, when it doesn’t occur to you that in life you have to seek your own happiness, when you got it in your head that your boyfriend / your husband is the one who is responsible, you are in trouble.
I know this because I have thought that I was the helpless innocent little one before. It grated people no end. You put the people around you in a no-win situation. If they make you happy, it is only because they have bent over backwards to make your happy, and they can’t be happy at the same time. If they don’t make you happy, then they are guilty for allowing such a bad thing to happen to such a poor innocent soul. And the way they portray themselves as a poor innocent soul is not entirely inaccurate because they are too thick to understand how the system works.
So, to answer the question - is she a nice person? I cannot say that I know at all. But my gut feel is - I doubt it. Even if she were a nice person after all - she is a nurse, and it is after all a noble profession - I also yearned for the type of niceness where she’s more fully developed, more mature. Or at least, more curious about what it means to be mature.
She wasn’t an intellectual either. This is not a sin, but this makes it quite difficult for her to be my girlfriend.
Hastily, I SMSed Z: “Dun worry you din miss much”. I wanted to vent my frustration on someone, and at the same time make him feel less bad about the whole issue. 5 minutes later the horrific realisation dawned on me that this was the kind of remark which, if taken wrongly, could end a friendship. Yipes!
After that, things got a little weird. S and I were not talking much, and funnily enough we were both talking more to N than to each other. Maybe I was too hasty in applying those tests on her one after another. But if we talk about stuff, it’s not a bad thing to just throw out a few things to see what catches on. Always have 1 or 2 funny stories on standby so that you could throw it out and see what comes back at you. But for the most part she maintained a stony silence.
Later on S went to the bathroom, and N asked me for “feedback”. I said, “I don’t think this is going to work out. She’s not the type I’m looking for.” And then she nodded slowly. I asked her if S wasn’t really interested, and she said that S is a person who’s quite timid, and she’s also tired. I thought, yah, what to do.
N wanted to go buy something, and she asked us if we wanted to go along with her or if we wanted to stay and chat. S said something like, “it makes me a little sleepy to hang around here” so I took that as a tacit agreement that things were not going to work out. Quite a relief I tell you.
We didn’t want to make it awkward. We made small talk along the way. S has this disconcerting habit of asking you something, and then skipping out of your field of vision while you answer. Later on, we had dinner. Maybe it was because N had started talking about more earthly stuff that made S feel a little more at ease.
During dinner they chatted about stuff that nurses usually bitch about, like horny doctors hitting on them, and how in a certain hospital, the culture is that you were not promoted based on your merit, but also on how pretty you were and on whether you slept with the doctors. This jolted me because I used to go to that hospital to get my braces fixed, and I recalled that the nurse was quite pleasant looking and quite pal-ly with my dentist.
A sudden realisation hit me, as S wondered out loud if she should visit Scandinavia. And she asked if Scandinavia was near to America. OK, not a sin to not know that. But that reminded me of my mother who liked to travel to other countries, not because she was curious about them, but because it was a form of luxury that she wished to partake in. S really resembled my mother! And that is a deal breaker, because anybody who resembles my mother is out. I couldn’t imagine living in a place where there was one more person like her. Sorry, but I don’t really get along with my mother. I know she’s my mother but I don’t approve of her character.
At that time, though, we were served by a waitress who was a little too cute to be a waitress. Of course I’m on a date and it’s quite bad form to gawk at a waitress, but I did succumb to following her around with my eyes a few times.
All the same, dinner wasn’t too bad. It was a relief to hear them talk. N was doing much of the talking. I wasn’t expecting S to suddenly come up with some exciting comment and she didn’t surprise me in that respect. I tried to keep the evening going as pleasantly as I could. Be good company.
OK, S and N are good friends. S is serious about her career. I would gather that she’s fairly competent at her job. I could have judged S a little too harshly. Let me remind all those people reading here that I have judged her on a very specific set of criteria, which is her prospects as my girlfriend. Somebody else having a different set could judge her much better. But it would have to be a quite different set.
We popped into a guardian pharmacy on our way back to the MRT station. While S was lining up at the cashier’s I started heh-heh-heh-ing to myself. N asked me what I was doing. I said I was laughing because this was going to be my last date with S. Then it was oops maybe I shouldn’t have said that. But I could tell she didn’t mind my honesty. I was sniggering to myself in the manner of a naughty boy who just crashed his bike, and decides that he should laugh at it rather than cry over it.
I don’t dislike her as a person, but I felt that she had more work to do before she became more eligible. (So do I, actually, but that’s a different matter.) S was going on the north line with me, so we got on the same train together. Coincidently that cute waitress was on that train too. She had just gotten off work. She put on earphones. (I was just commenting the other day that chiobus do that on public transport so that people wouldn’t try to chat them up) Then she did something that made my heart stop for a second. She pulled out a copy of DH Lawrence’s “Women in Love”. DH Lawrence! This is clearly a woman who is after my heart. For those of you not that conversant with English Literature, DH Lawrence is an author famous for writing about sexuality. He takes peoples’ sex lives and examines it from all angles. People in his novels have torrid, spiritual, wonderful sex. This waitress - what the fuck is a DH Lawrence reader doing being a waitress anyway? - this waitress clearly has an attitude towards romantic relationships that I am more sympathetic to, which is, I want something stupendous, mind blowing, sexy, dangerous, glorious. I want fireworks. Romance. I want to get high, drunk, I want to die with a smile on my face. Of course, this is something S also aspires to. But she wasn’t sending any such signals.
If S was not around, I could have tried to get her phone number. Damn it, this is the first time this has ever happened to me, there is this cute waitress that makes me interested, and suddenly she is off work and standing next to me. And I can’t do anything because my blind date is next to me. Is there no justice in this world?!
Afterword: A few days after the fact I met N and she told me that she arranged the blind date for me because she thought that I needed it. I thought that was funny. Usually in a blind date, one party is the one who wants a partner, and the other person is somebody who’s just curious to see what the first one is like. Now we had a blind date where both people are “just curious”! No wonder it didn’t work out.
Monday, 23 February 2009
Saturday, 14 February 2009
Songwriting Partnerships
Watched "Music and Lyrics" on the strong recommendation of Shorty.
I think some people have formed songwriting partnerships, because their talents complement each other. Some partnerships are divided upon pretty clean lines. Like Elton John writes the music, Bernie Taupin writes the lyrics. Burt Bacharach writes the music, Hal David writes the lyrics. Rodgers and Hammerstein.
Then there are other songwriting partnerships where there is a collective agreement, that if any one of those members writes a song, it gets credited to the group. REM and Sonic Youth have this arrangement, and it certainly didn't hurt the longevity of the band. Lennon / McCartney and Jagger / Richards had collective songwriting credit even after they've stopped writing together.
Then there are bands where 2 songwriters contribute to the ouevre of a band. This has often resulted in splits. After the Bell and Chilton axis drifted a part, Chris Bell left Big Star. After Jeff Tweedy and Jay Farrar found their styles incompatible, that was the end of Uncle Tupelo (but the beginning of Wilco and Son Volt). Even when you had Bob Mould and Grant Hart who wrote songs that were compatible with each other, the band could fall apart due to personality differences. But there is also the example of Teenage Fanclub, who have 3 different songwriters (although I can't really tell who wrote what by listening to the songs) and are still going strong today.
Partnerships weren't really meant to last. Jazz bands are much more promiscuous than pop bands, they typically don't last much more than 1 band. I think that most people consider themselves as session musicians. Or maybe the rules of bebop are well known enough to everybody that they can just slot themselves in anywhere and jam along.
But perhaps songwriting is an activity where the partners need time to get accommodated to each other. It’s fairly unusual that a novel will be co-written with anybody else, so songwriting must be slightly different.
In that movie, Drew Barrymore says (but this is improbable: she seems to be lecturing somebody 10 years older who had been a star, and who’s sold millions of albums) that melody is like the great first impression that you make, and lyrics are more like the content of the song. In a way she is right: it is possible to write a song in 5 minutes, but not the entire lyrics of a song. But sometimes melodies also create a lasting impression. You can read some words once and after that it’s just not the same anymore, because you got the meaning already. Whereas you can play the tune over and over again and not get tired of it, almost as though it were like doing a physical exercise, or like you were fucking somebody.
Speech has an accent (accent is about where you came from and how you speak but it is more precisely about which syllables get how much emphasis). A melody also also has certain notes which get emphasised more than others. The idea of matching music to melodies is to match the patterns of emphasis.
I've been reading a book about the Beatles so I can see a songwriting partnership in action. Lennon and McCartney are unusual in the sense that both of them write music and lyrics. Usually in other collaborations one is the composer and the other the lyricist. (Bacharach / David, Elton John / Bernie Taupin, Joe Strummer / Mick Jones). When one writes the lyrics and the other the words the division of labour is straightforward. In the case of Lennon / McCartney anything goes. Some songs which are labelled like that are real collaborations but most belong to one of those two, with the other one offering some tips and suggestions.
Then there is Manic Street Preachers where 2 of the guys write the words and the other 2 write the music. But they are not very good at fitting the music to the words. Radiohead is another band that does not bother too much if the words do not fit the music.
I've never written lyrics before the music. But I read a comment by Mick Jones of the Clash. He looks at the lyrics, and the accent of the words are so strong and rhythmic that a melody suggests itself. "Alfie", which Burt Bacharach lists down as his favourite composition, was an example of how the words were written first. But when you hear it now, the amount of melodic invention in that one is remarkable.
I think that one of the hallmarks of a good song is that it has an interesting chord structure. It is like saying that a model is beautiful because she has beautiful bones. That is not easy. Lou Reed, when he was writing for the Velvet Underground said "one chord is fine. Two chords you're pushing it. Three chords you're into jazz." Fine, the Velvet Underground has a reputation for using very few chords. But how many chords does "I'm Beginning to See the Light" have?
This is combinatorics. The more chords you play with, the more likely you will find something interesting. One of the examples I can think of is "Yesterday". Remember how every chord change triggers a change in emotions. By that measure, "Yesterday" is a roller coaster ride. Every note in the scale appears in the baseline at least once. Consider:
Yesterday, (mood: contemplative)
Love was such an easy game to play (mood: tragic)
Now I need a place to hide away (mood: here you release the tension of the tragic chord)
Oh yesterday (mood: somber)
Ended suddenly (mood: a slight lift as you resolve to the tonic)
(tonic in musical jargon means you are at home base again)
Why she (mood: tension. Stand by for descending bassline)
Had to go I don't know (mood: melody and bassline go in different directions. Drama.)
She wouldn't say. (mood: a series of resolutions brings you back to the tonic. Repeat this again.)
I said something wrong now I long for (mood: same as above)
yesterday (mood: there is a similar resolution here as the last line, but it is higher. This resolution is more resolute. Chorus is over, go back to the beginning.)
Notice that just as in sex, there is a series of alternations between cranking up the tension and releasing it. It is possible that humans were made to understand the joy of music so that they can also understand the joy of sex. This also explains why, once you are a rock star you can basically fuck anybody you want.
I think some people have formed songwriting partnerships, because their talents complement each other. Some partnerships are divided upon pretty clean lines. Like Elton John writes the music, Bernie Taupin writes the lyrics. Burt Bacharach writes the music, Hal David writes the lyrics. Rodgers and Hammerstein.
Then there are other songwriting partnerships where there is a collective agreement, that if any one of those members writes a song, it gets credited to the group. REM and Sonic Youth have this arrangement, and it certainly didn't hurt the longevity of the band. Lennon / McCartney and Jagger / Richards had collective songwriting credit even after they've stopped writing together.
Then there are bands where 2 songwriters contribute to the ouevre of a band. This has often resulted in splits. After the Bell and Chilton axis drifted a part, Chris Bell left Big Star. After Jeff Tweedy and Jay Farrar found their styles incompatible, that was the end of Uncle Tupelo (but the beginning of Wilco and Son Volt). Even when you had Bob Mould and Grant Hart who wrote songs that were compatible with each other, the band could fall apart due to personality differences. But there is also the example of Teenage Fanclub, who have 3 different songwriters (although I can't really tell who wrote what by listening to the songs) and are still going strong today.
Partnerships weren't really meant to last. Jazz bands are much more promiscuous than pop bands, they typically don't last much more than 1 band. I think that most people consider themselves as session musicians. Or maybe the rules of bebop are well known enough to everybody that they can just slot themselves in anywhere and jam along.
But perhaps songwriting is an activity where the partners need time to get accommodated to each other. It’s fairly unusual that a novel will be co-written with anybody else, so songwriting must be slightly different.
In that movie, Drew Barrymore says (but this is improbable: she seems to be lecturing somebody 10 years older who had been a star, and who’s sold millions of albums) that melody is like the great first impression that you make, and lyrics are more like the content of the song. In a way she is right: it is possible to write a song in 5 minutes, but not the entire lyrics of a song. But sometimes melodies also create a lasting impression. You can read some words once and after that it’s just not the same anymore, because you got the meaning already. Whereas you can play the tune over and over again and not get tired of it, almost as though it were like doing a physical exercise, or like you were fucking somebody.
Speech has an accent (accent is about where you came from and how you speak but it is more precisely about which syllables get how much emphasis). A melody also also has certain notes which get emphasised more than others. The idea of matching music to melodies is to match the patterns of emphasis.
I've been reading a book about the Beatles so I can see a songwriting partnership in action. Lennon and McCartney are unusual in the sense that both of them write music and lyrics. Usually in other collaborations one is the composer and the other the lyricist. (Bacharach / David, Elton John / Bernie Taupin, Joe Strummer / Mick Jones). When one writes the lyrics and the other the words the division of labour is straightforward. In the case of Lennon / McCartney anything goes. Some songs which are labelled like that are real collaborations but most belong to one of those two, with the other one offering some tips and suggestions.
Then there is Manic Street Preachers where 2 of the guys write the words and the other 2 write the music. But they are not very good at fitting the music to the words. Radiohead is another band that does not bother too much if the words do not fit the music.
I've never written lyrics before the music. But I read a comment by Mick Jones of the Clash. He looks at the lyrics, and the accent of the words are so strong and rhythmic that a melody suggests itself. "Alfie", which Burt Bacharach lists down as his favourite composition, was an example of how the words were written first. But when you hear it now, the amount of melodic invention in that one is remarkable.
I think that one of the hallmarks of a good song is that it has an interesting chord structure. It is like saying that a model is beautiful because she has beautiful bones. That is not easy. Lou Reed, when he was writing for the Velvet Underground said "one chord is fine. Two chords you're pushing it. Three chords you're into jazz." Fine, the Velvet Underground has a reputation for using very few chords. But how many chords does "I'm Beginning to See the Light" have?
This is combinatorics. The more chords you play with, the more likely you will find something interesting. One of the examples I can think of is "Yesterday". Remember how every chord change triggers a change in emotions. By that measure, "Yesterday" is a roller coaster ride. Every note in the scale appears in the baseline at least once. Consider:
Yesterday, (mood: contemplative)
Love was such an easy game to play (mood: tragic)
Now I need a place to hide away (mood: here you release the tension of the tragic chord)
Oh yesterday (mood: somber)
Ended suddenly (mood: a slight lift as you resolve to the tonic)
(tonic in musical jargon means you are at home base again)
Why she (mood: tension. Stand by for descending bassline)
Had to go I don't know (mood: melody and bassline go in different directions. Drama.)
She wouldn't say. (mood: a series of resolutions brings you back to the tonic. Repeat this again.)
I said something wrong now I long for (mood: same as above)
yesterday (mood: there is a similar resolution here as the last line, but it is higher. This resolution is more resolute. Chorus is over, go back to the beginning.)
Notice that just as in sex, there is a series of alternations between cranking up the tension and releasing it. It is possible that humans were made to understand the joy of music so that they can also understand the joy of sex. This also explains why, once you are a rock star you can basically fuck anybody you want.
Saturday, 7 February 2009
Hot, Flat and Crowded
Limpeh has hung up his running shoes. Whereas before I ran I was 80% certain that my first marathon was going to be my last, I am now 99% certain. However I am entitled to be an armchair critic and give advice to people who might want to do the marathon one day. Of course he would be better off talking to people like our former colleague from PRC who did a sub 5, or the colonel who also did a sub 5 even as a veteran.
1. The sooner the better.
First the enrollment for the marathon has increased every year since 2002. I should have run in the early days when there were like less than 10000 participants. It is always more difficult with more people. Your running route is actually that much longer when you have to overtake people all the time every time you run. The other compelling reason is that everybody's growing older all the time, and fitness goes downhill after 30. I ran at a time in my life when I could afford to burn all the weekends I wanted to.
The first marathon I actually saw live was the Boston marathon. I was there for the weekend, and when I woke up it was going on, I could see them running a few blocks away from my friend's window, so it was a nice surprise. A cursory check finds that the qualification time is 3:20, so I don't think I will ever run that race. In Singapore anybody can participate.
2. Do your half marathon first.
I have my own half marathon timing from last year, and my running buddy's. Also I have both our marathon timings. In both cases the marathon timing is approximately 3 times that of the half marathon. A simple calculation will tell you that if you want to run a marathon in 8 hours (you have to because after that you don't know when the marshall will stop the race), you must do a half marathon in 2:40.
3. The one factor that determines whether you will get injured or not is your running style
If you are flat footed (I have a low arch) or if one of your legs is longer than the other then you should not run a marathon. Considering how easily I got injured during my marathon I concluded that I was actually a little lucky to finish the race. I should have been more careful about my running style. My feet get bashed up before I hit 25 km, so after that it's enduring the pain.
I had problems training. There was once I bashed up my feet while doing the rounds at McRitchie once and for the next few weeks was not able to go beyond 15 km.
4. Training
I undertrained. At the 28 km mark I realised that that was actually the furthest I had ever run in my life. My eyes popped out when I saw that the recommended running distance was 60 km a week. At my maximum I only ran twice a week, and a total of 35 km. It also recommended that you do a maximum of 32km at a stretch, while I only ever pushed myself up to 24 km.
I achieved what I wanted in the end - but barely. I would have run much harder if I was going to make a regular habit of marathon running, but I don't think so. Well I got what I wanted in the end so no point complaining.
Running on an empty stomach could make it more difficult for distances of more than 10 km.
5. Buddy
It is a real slog training for a marathon. Of course the buzz you get from running is good at relieving boredom. But even though I managed to do half my training on my own, it is good to have a buddy who is after the same objective as you are, and who is not going to fuck up, and whom you are not going to fuck up on. It helps greatly if he is of roughly the same fitness level (but my buddy is slightly better)
One reason why I have given up on marathon running is that the length of the time involved in training, and the having to recuperate and sleep a bit more after every run. The real marathon is not the 42 km but the training you have to put in for 4-5 months before the run.
6. National service
I would not have been able to do this without first having gone through national service. The big reason why the Singapore marathon is so well attended is the surfeit of people who have gone through national service. Running the race for me was only possible because I had foreknowledge of what it is like to eat shit. I found myself pushed to limits of endurance only previously encountered during NS. People who are eating shit for the first time will find it more difficult. Of course many others who have never put on a soldier's uniform before have run this race.
7. Singapore
Since Singapore is a tropical country, it is one of the toughest marathons on earth. Not a large part of the route is shaded. I realised that I had spoilt myself my picking shaded routes for my training (but I would not have it any other way. Why kill yourself training?) It is also tough because it is very crowded. But it is also easier than other marathon routes because it is flat. It is perfectly flat, I believe. You know the Thomas Friedman book, "Hot, Flat and Crowded"? That's the Singapore marathon.
In Singapore they stop the marathon after 8+ hours, because I didn't see any finishing times after 9 hours. I saw that in NY they allowed people to walk the marathon for 10 hours (this was mentioned because a walker - a 66 year old man - died after that).
Actually I have done some wikipedia-ing for marathons. I need to change my statement. I am 99% sure that I will never run another marathon in Singapore.
1. The sooner the better.
First the enrollment for the marathon has increased every year since 2002. I should have run in the early days when there were like less than 10000 participants. It is always more difficult with more people. Your running route is actually that much longer when you have to overtake people all the time every time you run. The other compelling reason is that everybody's growing older all the time, and fitness goes downhill after 30. I ran at a time in my life when I could afford to burn all the weekends I wanted to.
The first marathon I actually saw live was the Boston marathon. I was there for the weekend, and when I woke up it was going on, I could see them running a few blocks away from my friend's window, so it was a nice surprise. A cursory check finds that the qualification time is 3:20, so I don't think I will ever run that race. In Singapore anybody can participate.
2. Do your half marathon first.
I have my own half marathon timing from last year, and my running buddy's. Also I have both our marathon timings. In both cases the marathon timing is approximately 3 times that of the half marathon. A simple calculation will tell you that if you want to run a marathon in 8 hours (you have to because after that you don't know when the marshall will stop the race), you must do a half marathon in 2:40.
3. The one factor that determines whether you will get injured or not is your running style
If you are flat footed (I have a low arch) or if one of your legs is longer than the other then you should not run a marathon. Considering how easily I got injured during my marathon I concluded that I was actually a little lucky to finish the race. I should have been more careful about my running style. My feet get bashed up before I hit 25 km, so after that it's enduring the pain.
I had problems training. There was once I bashed up my feet while doing the rounds at McRitchie once and for the next few weeks was not able to go beyond 15 km.
4. Training
I undertrained. At the 28 km mark I realised that that was actually the furthest I had ever run in my life. My eyes popped out when I saw that the recommended running distance was 60 km a week. At my maximum I only ran twice a week, and a total of 35 km. It also recommended that you do a maximum of 32km at a stretch, while I only ever pushed myself up to 24 km.
I achieved what I wanted in the end - but barely. I would have run much harder if I was going to make a regular habit of marathon running, but I don't think so. Well I got what I wanted in the end so no point complaining.
Running on an empty stomach could make it more difficult for distances of more than 10 km.
5. Buddy
It is a real slog training for a marathon. Of course the buzz you get from running is good at relieving boredom. But even though I managed to do half my training on my own, it is good to have a buddy who is after the same objective as you are, and who is not going to fuck up, and whom you are not going to fuck up on. It helps greatly if he is of roughly the same fitness level (but my buddy is slightly better)
One reason why I have given up on marathon running is that the length of the time involved in training, and the having to recuperate and sleep a bit more after every run. The real marathon is not the 42 km but the training you have to put in for 4-5 months before the run.
6. National service
I would not have been able to do this without first having gone through national service. The big reason why the Singapore marathon is so well attended is the surfeit of people who have gone through national service. Running the race for me was only possible because I had foreknowledge of what it is like to eat shit. I found myself pushed to limits of endurance only previously encountered during NS. People who are eating shit for the first time will find it more difficult. Of course many others who have never put on a soldier's uniform before have run this race.
7. Singapore
Since Singapore is a tropical country, it is one of the toughest marathons on earth. Not a large part of the route is shaded. I realised that I had spoilt myself my picking shaded routes for my training (but I would not have it any other way. Why kill yourself training?) It is also tough because it is very crowded. But it is also easier than other marathon routes because it is flat. It is perfectly flat, I believe. You know the Thomas Friedman book, "Hot, Flat and Crowded"? That's the Singapore marathon.
In Singapore they stop the marathon after 8+ hours, because I didn't see any finishing times after 9 hours. I saw that in NY they allowed people to walk the marathon for 10 hours (this was mentioned because a walker - a 66 year old man - died after that).
Actually I have done some wikipedia-ing for marathons. I need to change my statement. I am 99% sure that I will never run another marathon in Singapore.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)