July 16, 2010

J’aime le Tour, Part 1

« ... »

Hello all! Some of you may have been confused by my recent social networking pictures and statuses, if you keep track of that kind of thing. You will have noted I’m cheering for people you’ve never heard of in a sport you can’t identify without it being named. Well, I have decided to change that. Here is the concept of le Tour.

Le Tour was started in 1903 or thereabouts by a man named Desgrange, who owned a sport newsletter. Sales were low, and a common thing to boost them was to start and advertise races; then people would buy papers to find out what happened. Desgrange had the brilliant idea of beginning a race that circumnavigated all of France; such a race would be the most epic in the world – and sell a lot of papers.

In those days, the Tour was hard. Stages of over 500 km over poorly paved or unpaved roads were common, although mountains were not introduced until 1905 sometime (to make things more interesting). Degrange had the ideal of lone men, suffering over great stretches, lone heros out to prove their worth against the elements and each other. So he made a bunch of despotic rules: No assisting each other; You must carry all of your equipment, food, and water for each day yourself; If your bike breaks, you must fix it yourself without assistance or withdraw. This led to one contestant, Eugene Christophe (nicknamed The Old Gaul) twice in two years breaking the front fork of his bike and walking for miles over the mountains to find a blacksmith shop where he could repair it. (He never won, but he had a lot of sympathetic fans.)

The race has changed a lot since then. Desgrange would not have liked it, but it is more popular than ever. Now, teams of up to nine riders each (200 max contestants) ride courses between 150 and 225 km long over the course of three weeks of July, with two rest days. They begin in various places in and around the country (this year beginning in Rotterdam), go over at least a little of each of the Alps and the Pyrenees, and since 1975 have ended with 8 laps on the Champs-Elysees in Paris. There are one or two riders on each team who are team captain, depending on the goals of the team; all the other riders are ‘domestiques’, there to help their captains through the stages without incident and to help them race faster. The domestiques may try to grab some glory in a stage win but their goal is not finish the race with the fastest overall time. That is the domain of the GC (Grand Competition?) contestants, men like Andy Schleck, Cadel Evans, Alberto Contador, or Lance Armstrong, the last having won each year between 1999 and 2005 (this is why he is famous – and he beat cancer first). (If there is a rider who is a champion in his own right, but who is working for another member of the team, he is called a ‘superdomestique’, like Fabian Cancellara or George Hincapie.)

Some technical notes – riding behind another cyclist is called drafting, and it can let a rider save up to 30% of his energy. The leader’s team will often set the pace, keeping their leader near the front where he is protected from crashes, which has the bonus effect of keeping him highly visible to the media. In flat stages with no mountains, the sprinters’ teams will take the lead in the last 5-10 km of a race (see below, after mountains).

The mountains and time trials are where the race is decided. The Prologue is usually a time trial, and for the last few years, Fabian Cancellara, “the Swiss Time Machine” (also nicknamed “Spartacus”), has won and gotten to wear the leader’s yellow jersey, the Maillot Jaune, for a few days. (There is also a white jersey for the fastest rider aged 25 and under.) This sorts all the cyclists into places, to see where they all stand in relation to each other. But it is the mountains that are really explosive. The strongest climbers go up the mountains like they were flying, while the rest flounder and struggle. Cancellara is not a strong climber, though he does his best, but the smaller riders like Schleck, Evans, or Contador have less weight and more drive.

There is also an award for the man who goes over the top of the most mountains first; the polka-dot (white with red dots) jersey. Most GC contenders aren’t interested in it; the yellow prize is bigger.

The sprinters, usually big men with big legs, struggle hugely on the mountains. Usually on the first climb, they fall off the peloton (as the main group of riders is called) and form a group called the autobus in order to make it over the climbs at their own pace. By the final stage, they will be as much as two or three hours behind the leaders. But they don’t care. Their goal is to win individual flat stages – and the coveted green points jersey. Points are awarded to the rider who crosses the finish line first, with decreasing numbers for the riders coming after them. The flat stages are thus kept interesting while letting the climbers conserve and regain their energy. The sprints are a work of art to watch; the ‘lead out train’ of each team jockeys for position in the kilometre leading up to the finish line – two or three riders in front of their main sprinter, letting him draft and pick up speed on the way to the line. As they tire, they will peel off, letting the man behind go even faster, until at last the final man shoots away at speeds up up to 75km an hour. Other sprinters without lead-out trains will follow the sprinter with a lead-out train, hoping to pass him in the last few metres. Currently, the ‘fastest man in the world’ is Mark Cavendish, the “Manx Missile” on the team HTC-Columbia. Once he goes, no one can get in front of him.

About crashes: they happen. They happen sometimes frequently. But unless a rider actually breaks his leg or his collarbone, they will usually continue, fighting against huge pain to complete the race, just to say they’ve done it, even if before they were a good contender for a top prize.

And of course no Tour is complete without watching it with the commentary of Phil Liggett, “the Voice of Cycling”, commentating since 1975, and his partner Paul Sherwen.

The Tour is an amazing sporting event, full of intense drama, beautiful scenery, exciting finishes, interesting personalities, clever tactics, and brilliant stories. I do not know if I’ve given it justice, but rest assured, this is only labelled Part 1, so anything I’ve forgotten can go in Part 2!

Cheers!

April 11, 2010

The Totally Not-Canon Adventures of Flairé: Pwn’d!

« ... »

ttncaofep1pg24

First     Back      Next      Latest

The Totally Not-Canon Adventures of Flairé: Episode 1: Lost Blackbird: Page 24: Pwn’d!

drawn April 11, ’10

(610)

          Leslie: (goes CHOMP on the bad guy’s hand)

          Enemy soldier: AAGH

           Other enemy soldiers: OH NO SHE HAS SUDDENLY BECOME FEISTY

           Jen: Why is feisty only applied to mildly violent women?

           SFX: THUD CRACK WHUD

           Flairé: Well, that’s the last of them for now. (having KO’d and pwned the bad guys, who are now lying in an unconscious heap)

           Leslie: Who were they?

           Flairé: A group of extremists who don’t believe in angels, frankly, and think that everyone should think the same. As my parents’ son, I’m a highly visible member of the… uhhh… ‘pro-angels’ group. I’m afraid they targeted you as someone I should and would protect. To try to make me stop.

Sorry, napping all day… Chorus concert yesterday… I think these are reasonable excuses for having only pencil up today. But colour will be up tomorrow.

So… looks like Leslie flipped out on that guy and then Flairé knocked all the bad guys out. And then we have some exposition. Isn’t exposition fun? (no, no, it’s not)

CHORUUUUUS It was so good! Except Supertenor in the Wagner, but that’s only to be expected. I love the Overture to Tanhauser, and it was really good to hear the overture to La Forza del Destino again. JerP says it’s way easier now than it was in CYMC. : D  Oh, and I love Rob. Why? Because he played the heck out of that anvil. <3

I’ve been reading books slavishly. I’m halfway through Moby Dick (srsly, everybody is an angst-bucket and he has a whole chapter on THE HISTORY OF WHITENESS) but I read The Subtle Knife for the first time yesterday/today and I can’t say I understand it very well. It’s… weird. I like the characters, and the story is interesting for story’s sake, but then… the ‘angels’ are numbskulls. I’m sure I’ll understand it better when I get the third book, but, like, why are they helping Azriel? If he’s planning to “kill God”, and the angels serve God (I mean, duh), what are they doing hanging out with him? And the whole anti-religion thing makes NO SENSE. “Teh Church has done many evil things because they don’t like knowledge because it contradicts faith so let’s destroy the Church! Heck, let’s not stop there - let’s destroy God too, because obviously a god with such a stupid following doesn’t deserve to live, let alone be worshipped!”

I’m sure I must have the interpretation completely wrong because there are so many things wrong with this view that I don’t know where to start. But let’s start here. 1) God is love. So…….. yeah, that makes the whole totalitarian militaristic Church in the other world just wacko. But that’s for story purposes and it’s… kind of believable, regretfully. 2) God is kind of beyond our perception, so the whole concept of ‘killing God’… just makes me want to headdesk. 3) Just out of curiousity, what are the soul-eating Spectres supposed to represent? There’s more, but I forgot it.

I’m getting a little twisted around because I’m not sure whether to apply the story to real life or not. Just because the Church in the other world in the book is totalitarian and militaristic and has excommunicated and executed people for opposing it or for seeking knowledge and truth, does that mean that the Church in the real world, which has done similar things in the past, is bad and should be wiped out? What should it be replaced with? (I’m sure I’ll find out in the third book, so no spoilers, plzkthx) And I’m not even starting in on my personal beliefs, which are fairly tolerant of other people’s (except intolerance, of course – totally shocking, intolerance is) while being fairly strict about my own. Aaaaaand… I don’t even know. Like I’ve been telling people all month, I need to do more research. Starting with the Bible which I haven’t actually read all the way through. I’ve read bits of it, of course. And I do know that it needs to be handled carefully because the authors in it (who may or may not be represented accurately through several translations) probably had a slightly different idea of… not ‘historical accuracy’, but that kinda thing.

Oh, about Spectres and my question above – are they a ‘racialized’ form of a real-life problem? apathy? things which eat at us day after day until we don’t care anymore? Except, of course, with the process vastly sped up to a few minutes. Or are they just some random antagonists to throw up obstacles for the non-child characters? And why are witches so weird? Is Azriel supposed to be the Devil? Why does that stupid knife have so many uses? Why is Will so casual about killing stuff except when he actually does? Didn’t Mrs. Coulter say she was going to stay in the world with daemons? Why on earth would ‘angels’ show up as undetectable-except-detectable particles? … I’ll shut up now.

Why do I keep going off on rants about religion? It must be one of the most boring (on blogs) and probably volatile subjects in the world. Anyway, I need to read Moby Dick first, I had a good weekend, see you again soon!

March 6, 2010

Religion in Literature

« ... »
Filed under: Random blog posts — Tags: , , — Illinia @ 2:40 pm

About: Religion in Literature
This is probably going to be shorter than I had originally intended but you never know.
Anyway, there are things I’ve noticed while reading books and things that include mentions of religion (Lord of the Rings is a big exception, and I’ll explain more below). I find myself confused. Now this might not seem like much, as it’s normal for me, but the thing is usually I’m quite firm that I know what I believe in. However, I have a pretty good imagination, and am usually very good at suspending my disbelief in a story in general – when I’m reading a story, I’m IN the story. (Unless it’s a terrible story like Escape 2000 – the MST3K is on YouTube). Ergo, I end up believing whatever interpretation of (Christian) religion is in the story while I’m reading it, which is probably understandable. (other kinds of religion don’t seem to affect me)
This is getting pretty rambling. …Meh.
Anyway, so when I’m reading things like The Robe (novelization of the life of the unknown soldier who crucified Jesus and ended up with his robe, and how it changed his life) or Paradis (quirky webcomic about angels) I believe in that… mythos? while I’m reading it. But then afterwards, I wonder if it’s true or not. And of course it isn’t; it’s all fiction. Simple enough. They tell you so themselves (Paradis: ‘for the purposes of this story, angels have free will…’). But then I start swinging the other way and doubting what I believe in because I haven’t looked up the source material yet. And THAT leads to the thought that the way people, even religious people, treat the Bible and other source material is very similar to how people treat canon and fanfiction in franchises. Not that I’ve studied such a thing terribly closely, but I’d like to know how we think we know so much. A bunch of, I’m sure, was revealed to someone or another, but it makes me wonder when Purgatory just shows up out of seemingly nowhere in what, the 3rd Century AD?
Oh, I was going to explain why LotR doesn’t fit in. It’s because it’s set in a world before any kind of modern religion at all, and therefore everyone believes in God and He doesn’t interfere in the story too too much after He sets it all up in the Ainulindale. The Valar are not angels, says Tolkien, and I believe him. Makes me wonder where the real angels are, but whatever. But while it’s an alternate history of Europe, it is far enough removed from my world as to be pure glorious fairy-tale that I can just enjoy and even believe in without it threatening my perceived view of the world today. C.S. Lewis is a bit harder, but still acceptable. My own mythology is very hard to wrestle with personally, though. I don’t want to offend anyone (and I’m not talking about humans!) so I want to make everything as true as possible – except with elves and unicorns and dragons and griffons, of course. But the religious aspect – which I don’t want to over-emphasize in the first three books – must be true for me, as true as Flairé has become if that makes sense. Except that I know (in my heart of hearts) that God and the angels exist and Flairé doesn’t. Maybe he does. In an alternate universe. But not in this one, except in my mind. I still get to love him though, don’t I?
So you know, I really don’t know. I know what I believe in, and I’m not leaving my faith. But I do wonder sometimes. Now where’s my Bible again?

 

This doesn’t even address what I think of Creationism which is pretty annoying stuff.

February 12, 2010

My country is embarrassing me

« ... »
Filed under: Random blog posts — Tags: , — Illinia @ 6:34 pm

Okay, kids, what’s up with the Olympics? I was going to ignore the whole thing, but it’s just a huge farce. And it’s barely begun.
Lessee… building a d*** stupid luge track that kills people who haven’t practiced on it; turning our perfectly good National Anthem into a pop song (ick); and to top it all off, proclaiming “WE’RE THE BEST”.
Hello! We’re only the best if we don’t brag about it!
I think we’re no better or worse than any other nation in the world, but congratulations to us, we’re just the next country to find out that the Olympics brings out the worst in the whole flippin everything. Everyone who gets the Olympics tries way too hard, and this just makes them targets for criticism. Targets with neon glow-in-the-dark bullseyes. (and if they don’t try hard, they will get criticized for not spending lots of money! And if they spend lots of money, they get criticized when it’s over budget (and still lame)! D8 infinite loop lose-lose situation! Curse public opinion…)
To bring up stereotypes – we have a pretty good one. We’re the nice, quiet, fairly polite, cynical bunch up north with a dysfunctional political system that we ignore anyway. In general. We’re often the butt of jokes, but we don’t really get too worked up about it. Unlike the other stereotype down south, the Americans, who are all patriotic in their DNA and like to laugh loudly and some of them are pigheads, though none of the ones I’ve ever met. (the ones I’ve met are usually pretty awesome folks) And we’re not like the British, who are all supposed to be fairly stoic and goodnatured or whatever. And we get to act as translators between the two. : ) Okay, that had nothing to do with this, but whatever.
So, yeah, we have no more or fewer of jerks and loudmouths and ignorant people and pigheads and hypocrites than any other country in the world. That’s because we’re all humans together, no matter the culture.
But if we start bragging about how great we are, we immediately set ourselves up for a big, long fall.
I guess it’s kind of like what a friend was talking about the other day: everyone’s only interested in the next huge spectacle. But from reports from (my brother in) the basement, it’s not even that spectacular. (also Google twitter reports I glanced at are not impressed with the rendition of our Anthem either so I’m not alone).
I’m not interested in politics. I usually don’t have any idea what I’m talking about. But this sports deal is just way too stupid to ignore.
So, Canada, please stop trying so hard. It’s not working and you’re just embarrassing the lot of us.

Apologies for the rant. I’ve been having problems with life in general and felt like being snarky. It was sunny today, but it’s mostly been cloudy and cold and wet and spring break is here so no school and my repertoire is hanging in there but I in no way measure up to halfway to the people on my recordings. I wish I was a kalla.

I had the idea that I found Tam’s Last Stand song the other day, but I’ve forgotten what it was. : ( I think it was Mozart but I’m probably wrong.

Powered by WordPress. All original characters, settings, and art are © Jennifer Mitchell. She claims no ownership of any characters, settings, stories, concepts, or art that belongs to other people, including but not restricted to Nintendo, the Tolkien estate, and Games Workshop.