Reading and My Trend

It's Saturday and I have been sitting at this computer for quite a while. While my schedule has been quite packed and I nearly decided to accompany Holland's Science Olympiad team, I still managed to find some reading. (I usually leave the house at 7:35 AM and get back and around 8:45 PM) I didn't actually go to SO, but I hope the team did well. Anyway, reading: Play scripts, play posters, the little papers with the cast list, the cheat sheet of what scene comes next, etc. Kidding. Although I think I have read all of those. And I saw Susan and Anna at the play! (Ignoring the fact that they know many other people who were also part of the cast)
     Real reading: The END of the Seekers series. I have had the book for so long and not a chance to read it. It's currently sitting sort of near my bed in hopes that I will finish it sometime soon. I am still curious how this will all work out. There are three different types of bears and a shape-shifting bear, right? So how is it all going to end up happily?  I am more than halfway through and wondering if the ending will be very strange. I found only the first book and this book are really enjoyable, because all the ones in between were somewhat similar. There's so much travelling that problems just start getting reused: hunger, tension, where are we going? I don't think there's a chapter that doesn't discuss the lack of food or the joy of finding some. Luckily, the first and the last are not so much of going somewhere as figuring things out. The beginning was neat because each bear had a different background and they each still had their own story to follow, but once all four come together, the story is basically the same other than the shift in the point of view.
     The other thing that bothered me was the idea as a whole. These are bears who are supposed to be facing serious problems, mostly because their homes are being destroyed and they are wandering. Other than the fact they talk to each other and travel together, they seem like relatively normal bears. But then the authors just pulled out this idea of a magic, shape-shifting bear and it doesn't fit very well. I sort of believed that these bears were there and travelling around, especially since they add a map of Canada and list all these very specific places they went through. Facts were used specifically about each kind of bear to make everything seem realistic. So why did there have to be a magical bear? It's not terrible, but it just bothered me a bit.
     Other reading: What is the What. My mom got it from the library and we are both reading it! We just started, so there's not much to say yet. But I am very excited.
     Trend reading this week has been less than other weeks. There was one article that I found in class last week before my eyes were completely screwy from that screen. More and more my topic comes together and then separates. I honestly try to throw other minimalist shoes into the mix, but it's really so hard to. It's becoming barefoot on one side and Five Fingers on the other, because it's so hard to look for both at the same time. But in the article I mentioned I did find something that said that sales tripled since Born to Run was published. I also read little bits of the book online, and read a bit more about it. I'm trying now to really find facts that will help support it, because even though every article refers to it as a rising star in the running world, there aren't that great of facts so far. I think this essay will turn out pretty well!

This Week Was Strange

That means I really don't want to think about next week. Research for my trend? Well yesterday I spent the whole day (ish) at a forensics tournament because ever since I was about seven I have been at the ones in Holland, selling food. No one has worked longer than my mom and I. Most parents stay for one or two years and then let someone else take charge. So every year they go to my mom for advice and totally disregard it. (I may or may not be coming to a point here) Anyway, they let my mom and I take over the cash registers, and we are hopeful that they listened to our advice that the would need ridiculous amounts of ones and quarters because kids come with twenties for a bag of chips (50 cents). Of course, we open up our registers to find one quarter roll to split between both of us, and a total of zero tens, three fives, and twenty-some ones. We are trying to warn the lady in charge that as soon as the lunch crowd hits (anytime in the next few minutes) we will be toast because we have enough change for roughly two kids with twenties. So it was quite annoying and a lot of people now think I am bad at math because I had to keep asking my mom if she had any change and many people thought I just didn't know how to give them change for a twenty. (No, believe it or not, I actually can tell you that I should give you eighteen dollars, but of course I don't have it!) So one poor kid waited for about ten minutes until we could get change for him and a few left without fifty cents they should have had. My point: after seeing a lot of kids go through I did not see any of them wearing Five Fingers or going barefoot. But then again no one was running and I don't think you're allowed to wear things connected to your topic. As weird as that may sound, it is extremely possible that someone might have been giving a speech about the shoes. But then again there are thousands of other topics they might have been doing and some of then weren't even giving prepared speeches. So that's why I didn't post yesterday. Otherwise I have done some additional reading for my topic. I need to start a new paragraph.
     Research this week has been a lot of reading. I've been spending a lot of time with Runner's World (A running magazine) that has different stories about minimalist shoes and some about barefoot running. I found this sort of surprising considering all the ads for running shoes in there. I also found a Popular Science article about bad news for the running shoe. That was pretty exciting. A lot of the things I find link back to two things. Either they read/heard about the barefoot professor and the Harvard study, or they read Born to Run. (I'm not discussing Bruce Springsteen) So I decided it was probably the tiniest bit important to learn about this book. I found a website for the book and what did I find? A list of ten big newspapers that wrote about running barefoot. How lucky! (There is also one of these on the Virbram website for all the times newspapers mentioned FiveFingers) I sort of looked through those and a lot were interviews with the author, Christopher McDougall. Then I found an almost hour long (52 min) Google Talk with the author which I am still working my way through because it's obviously pretty long. So far it's quite interesting and I don't really want to have to pause it. One thing that's been hard is not trying to make this into a persuasive essay. I think it's really easy to just find out why it's good more than why it's growing more popular and where the trend is growing more popular. But it is really weird to think about these people that were told not to run because of injuries and that they would hurt themselves and then they learn about running barefoot and try out shoes like the Five Fingers and suddenly there's no pain. It's also been hard to think about because of something I just heard the author of Born to Run. He just read something that an editor from Runner's World said about how we were not 'engineered' to run long distances barefoot. So I'm sort of curious as to how the magazine has put out multiple articles about how shoes aren't necessarily a good thing and some people might benefit from not using them. I think as of now I have a lot of proof for my trend. :)

Before I forget! This coming Thursday, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday (March 24, 25, 26, and 27) our school will have a performance of The Music Man! It's in the Holland High performing arts center at 7:00 on Thur. Fri. and Sat. and 2 pm on Sun. Tickets will go on sale an hour before and doors open at 6:30! (Or 1:30 on Sunday) Some of you will remember Delaney from last year's class and will recognize her as the leading female role: Marian! I will also be in it as one of the old ladies who walks around and is annoyed with everything that happens until I become irrationally excited. (That's the best way to describe it because almost no one has a real name for their character and if they do it's one that you never really hear) Anyway, you are all invited and I think if you came you'd enjoy it!

And Now For Some Experimenting

This can be so frustrating! It's sometimes hard to tell what is an interesting article and what is just trying to get me to buy a shoe. I looked for articles on barefoot running and minimalist shoes for a while on the computer. Then my mom came in and told me that my brother had sent her an article about it from a study  a while ago. I have been watching video after video after video on YouTube on running barefoot. I found a particularly interesting video that I, unfortunately, didn't ever finish. It pointed out a few things. When wearing running shoes, you generally land on your heel. If you were to take off those shoes and just jump up and down on your heel, it would be difficult because there's not much cushion or anything to make your feet bounce back. (Okay, it's nearly impossible to jump on just your heels) Jumping completely on the toes is a little easier, but there's not much cushion. But, if you try on the forefoot (middle to front), it's easy! (Now half of you feel really embarrassed because you just tried jumping just using your heels and it didn't work.) I thought that was an interesting point to make, although I'm not sure who runs on their toes. So that was pretty weird to think about.
     Then I read a few different news articles in different papers. The website for one of the shoes has links to just about every article written about them. I have been trying to find some studies here and there, and I've found a few. The one I am looking at now is a study from a professor at Harvard, which is actually quite interesting! There is a video that was posted of an interview/ explanation with this man on YouTube, and I think I get why these shoes are so popular. When you prove that heel-striking causes a sharp shock to your body, you have people saying "Oh! Then I better not use shoes!" But then people start to doubt that running barefoot is a good idea. What if I step on something? So then these shoe people jump in and say "Hey! Look at this amazing shoe!" and the attention is brought to a shoe where you move more naturally. (Forefoot strike) Yes, reading and watching for my trend essay.

(And now that I have been looking up this topic I am starting to really want a pair of minimalist shoes. I would probably feel strange using them, since I don't run that much, yet. Thank goodness this isn't a persuasive essay.)

On Romeo and Juliet

     I would like to start off by answering the question of what I would change if writing the play. I think I would end up doing everything differently, but not because I wanted to. If I wrote this play, no one would want to read it because somehow I do not seem to be able to write like Shakespeare. But besides that slightly important detail, I don't think I would change anything. I think everyone agrees that the language in this play is beautiful. Changing it to make it easier for younger people to understand would ruin it. The one thing I might do is change the Prologue. Why remind them what happens in the end? I would keep all the explanations of what's going on (These two families are fighting...) What if someone was hearing this story for the first time? I would want it to be a surprise for them, so although I would want them to know what was happening, why spoil the end by telling them the ending? I don't think I would be happy by changing the end, so that they end up alive. It was really frustrating to have everyone come at the wrong time, but I don't want them to run away, either. It was somehow very satisfying to see them all dead. Maybe because I knew that they were supposed to die. Hmmm, maybe I shouldn't change the Prologue. (In case you haven't noticed, I am not good at making decisions.)
     What did I like? There's not much I didn't like, actually. As I mentioned before, although I may not have always understood exactly what was happening, the language was still charming. The very first line I noticed was from Juliet at the end of the first Act. (Now I have to find it so I don't screw it up)

My only love, sprung from my only hate!

Too early seen unknown, and known too late!

Prodigious birth of love it is to me

That I must love a loathed enemy.

     While I had to read it more than once to understand completely, I still thought it was amazing! Then, after we finished that, it was pointed out that it was in iambic pentameter. Now, it's not only touching, but there is a further appreciation for the writing. (It would take me quite a while to come up with a rhyme like that)

     My favorite character was probably Friar Lawrence. He always helped out both Romeo and Juliet, and was trying to help the families by marrying them. He stopped both of them from killing themselves before the end. And he said things like "Holy Saint Francis!" He was the only one who is on both sides, really. Romeo and Juliet were wrapped up in themselves. The Capulets and the Montagues hated each other. Mecrutio sided more with the Montagues. Paris and Escalus didn't really help anyone, and Friar John screws everything up for everyone. How could you not like Friar Lawrence? Sure, it's frustrating that he can't save them, and that he couldn't send the letter properly. But I imagined the ending without Friar Lawrence, and it doesn't look too good. Who would be there that knew their story? There was the letter from Romeo, which basically killed him mother, and there was the nurse, who knew a little about the marriage but really thought Juliet had died. So who better to tell the story than our friend the Friar? Sure, he gives Juliet a highly suspicious potion, but it does what he promised. Our job is not to question why this little man is brewing strange potions in his cell, but to appreciate that he has them on hand, just in case someone needs to appear to be dead.

     After him, I don't know who I like better than others. Nurse was sort of strange, sometimes funny, but strange. Juliet more sensible than many of her relatives (any Capulet) and the Montagues, but she went a little crazy after Act II. There seems to be no point where she is not crying or yelling after that. She cries when she hears Romeo is banished, when she sees Friar Lawrence, and then is 'dead' until she actually dies. It's not the best way to be remembered. What she did say in the first two acts was usually either carefully thought or sounded delicate and beautiful. Romeo always seems to be running somewhere, acting quickly, or jumping around. Strangely enough, I always thought of him to be the more relaxed one. Then there's Mecrutio. At first he was slightly scary and strange. But now I just remember him, thanks to Stephanie, as a strange bird. He just said all this strange things. Sometimes they were funny and strange, and sometimes they were just strange. And everyone else was not that great. Paris and Escalus: not that great. Paris was sort of pushy and loud. Escalus didn't do that much, other than ride in at opportune moments. And how could anyones' favorite character be Tybalt? (My apologies to the person who had to be Tybalt. Anna, I believe) He ruined it for the poor Romeo and Juliet. He did make the story more interesting, but that doesn't mean I have to appreciate it. Let's see, who else? There are little people, like Peter, and the Musicians, and the Apothecary. I'm sure that they all would have been great had they been particularly easily remembered by me. Peter stood there a lot. (None of the servants are that memorable, except for the biting of the thumbs) I don't remember much of the Musicians, other than they wouldn't play a song for Peter. The Apothecary just sold him the poison, reluctantly. So they don't really compete for that spot. Then there's Benvolio. He's just a mischievous friend of Romeo. I thought he was a little more adventurous than Romeo, but not as crazy as Mecrutio. He always seemed to want to cheer Romeo up, get him into a better mood. I bet he was probably pretty sad after both Mecrutio and Romeo died.

     Is there anything else? Struggles? Obviously, line by line wasn't always clear. I think I probably got most of the picture, though. It made sense. Sometimes it was better to have to read a little slower, because it was easier to pick up little details, and appreciate the quality of the writing more.

A glooming peace this morning with it brings.

The sun for sorrow will not show his head.

Go hence, to have more talk of these sad things;

Some shall be pardon'd, and some punished;

For never was a story of more woe

Than this of Juliet and her Romeo.

From Romeo and Juliet Act V, Scene III,  (317-322)