Skip to content


Archery: The First Month

Meeting a personal milestone: all three arrows of the same end in red or better, three ends in the same shoot, three shoots in a row.

I have of late discovered a highly addictive sport. As many of those close to me are aware, I can suddenly find an interest in a random subject so compelling, that I must begin a willful obsession with it and begin to learn as much as I can about its innermost workings and structure. Eventually, I will not be able to contain myself from trying it out. Nearly 100% of the time, the act of experiencing whatever subject of interest it was is enough to sate my curiosity on the subject, and I move on. I am definitely a “shiny object” type of person.

On rare occasion, however, I continue running with these random intellectual experimentations and develop a lasting passion. Two such subjects that have yet to subside in their in appeal, despite years since my initial foray into their pull, are theatre and photography. Indeed, for passions such as these, the depth of appreciation and curiosity has only grown. This year I have added another to the list of interests that I fear will occupy me to no end: archery.

Like my other hobbies/passions/obsessions, I have no clue how the idea initially occurred to me to begin my study of this craft. More than likely, I decided to just “try it out” at the local archery range (H&W Archery in Lancaster, $10/hr for range time, includes the equipment rental). I started shooting rather haphazardly on a very basic, 20-pound-draw-weight Buckeye recurve model by Precision Sports Equipment (PSE). Though my initial form, posture, and release were awful, the resident coach, John Hollister, stuck with me. Combined with a disproportionate amount of practice relative to homework time, I was able to improve rapidly.

While I’ve certainly not become any sort of expert or master in the paltry one month or so  in which I have been shooting, I have progressed enough such that I no longer feel that buying my own equipment would be a waste of time and money, and have recently done so. I have some lessons learned and experiences to share in getting to this point.

FIND A BIG-PICTURE REASON TO ENJOY THE SPORT.

If you’re just headed to your local range to try out the sport, this is not really that important. But after you’ve had a chance to explore the feeling of it and start to become hooked, it’s a good idea, for any pastime, to know why it is exactly you are doing it. Are you a hunter? Interested in competitive target archery? Want to get out in the woods and try some field archery, or any number of the other competitive and scored variants of the sport?

For me, I love the feeling of strength, mental concentration, and meditative focus combining in an instant… hitting the bullseye is a nice side-effect of the true metric — inner stillness and strength. It’s pretty difficult for me, and I think it always will be; a perpetual challenge, is there anything better?

START LIGHT, AND FOCUS ON THE FUNDAMENTALS.

I’m a manly man, you might think to yourself, or perhaps, a wonder woman. I want to shoot the “real” bows used for hunting or competition, those with anywhere from 40 to 80 lbf of draw weight (force required to hold the bow at the design draw length).  Stronger bows are not only more impressive to handle physically, but they impart more force to the arrow upon release, resulting in higher velocities, reduced arc and disturbance, and greater penetrating power… all good things. So why not? The answer: form.

Form is not just for pansies. Do not over-bow yourself; careful attention to proper muscle distribution, posture, draw length, and anchor points will result in clean, consistent accuracy. What good is a powerful hit if you can’t summon it on command, or can only only deliver it by occasional chance? Over-bowing can also be dangerous, for you and for those around you; remember, even though you will start on a lighter draw-weight bow, these are deadly weapons that were most at-home on battlefields and hunting grounds for over ten thousand years. Take the time to develop good form on the light bows, where you don’t also have to worry about shaking arms, sore backs and shoulders, and an inability to relax your grip… It’s enough of a challenge without those distractions.

It is a lot easier to learn good form the right way first, instead of having to possibly unlearn some bad habits later on down the road. Don’t believe me? There’s a great thread on the ArcheryTalk Forums on this very subject.

PRACTICE, PRACTICE, PRACTICE.

You can read all the books, forums, websites, and blog posts that you want on the subject, but eventually, anything that actually has value eventually has to be applied to mean something. Go to the range, and shoot. Do it regularly, do it often, and each time remember what you observed in the last shoot about yourself. Come with a plan for what you will work on, and stick to it. Shoot for at least an hour at a time, but don’t go so long that you can no longer maintain consistent form and focus. Lastly, nothing beats a knowledgeable, experienced, and patient coach.

ENHANCE YOUR FITNESS LEVEL.

If you would like to enhance your fitness experience with archery, even if just to build up to some stronger bows, then develop a workout schedule that fits with the type of archery you want to do (coming back around to my first point about knowing why you are doing what you are doing).

My goal is to enhance strength (at least to the point of comfortably drawing a 45# bow), build muscular stamina, train for extended outdoor exploration, and in general improve my overall fitness level.

Monday, Wednesday, Friday: Weights that emphasize rhomboids, trapezus, and deltoids, with other upper body, shoulder, and back muscles as desired. For muscular stamina, higher repetition is more beneficial than higher weight (try 3 sets of 15 reps at a weight level enough to provide an active resistance). Rowing or crew exercises also target the same muscle groups as archery.

Tuesday, Thursday: Give the sore muscles a chance to rebuild, and focus on cardiovascular endurance. Running, cycling, etc.

Weekends: Rest, without excluding the opportunity for light jogs, extended walks, etc as they come up.

Having just been though this experience, I highly recommend these steps for a fulfilling beginning to an addictive sport with a rich history. More posts to come as I progress and explore, I have no doubt.

Posted in sport.


Review of THE KITCHEN PLAYS, 2 of 2: JIMMY JUMPS SUNNY SIDE UP

This is the second of two reviews for this weekend’s trip to NoHo for the Road Theatre Company‘s Off-Road workshop production of THE KITCHEN PLAYS. The series consists of four one-act plays, all written, produced, and directed by company members, and all taking place on the same kitchen set.  You can read my review of THE PETOSKEY STONES on a previous post, which provides some information about the series in general that I will not repeat here.

JIMMY JUMPS SUNNY SIDE UP is short on plot but more than makes up for it in character work. Writer Chris Goss plays Jimmy, a “freelance IT consultant” whose character absolutely nails the quintessential mid-twenties professional computer nerd: asocial, intelligent, awkward, arrogant, jaded, creative, and often a complete asshole. He is, of course, still living at home, as is the girl-next-door from his youth, Sunny; Deana Barone plays the gorgeous, sweet, promiscuous, eternally well-meaning airhead who just doesn’t quite… get it. Or him.  She has just been fired from her waitressing job for attitude and faces the prospect of begging for it back in the morning.

The play opens late at night (or perhaps in the wee hours of the morning) and Sunny has stumbled in through Jimmy’s front door, left wide open, apparently drunk. Jimmy is startled out of his computer repair project on which he is working. What follows is a highly emotionally-true dialog that reveals the struggle for identity and self-worth in a sea of days that seem to bring nothing special. And while being profound, it’s really funny. Funny because it’s true; I could swear I’ve met exactly these two characters in my life (or amalgamations thereof). I’ve just never had an opportunity to see them interact.

Barone artfully walks the fine line between reminding us of every airheaded party girl we’ve met,  but not letting the cliches cover up a real person in Sunny that shines through. Keeping a character of this nature honest and genuine beneath all the fronting is a real challenge, and Barone delivers.

I was very impressed with Goss, both in his acting and writing.  I think his character really struck a chord with me; I’ve shared that sense of nerdy isolation before, and certainly as an engineer I have met more than my fair share of socially awkward, sarcastic technogeeks, lashing out to cover internal insecurities.

Director Darryl Johnson shows a keen sense of timing in the careful placement of silence… moments that become horribly awkward, funny, and deep at the same time.  Engaging, thought-provoking, and often hilarious. JIMMY JUMPS SUNNY SIDE UP is definitely one I would recommend seeing.

The Road Theatre Company’s THE KITCHEN PLAYS runs January 7 through the 29 at the Lankershim Arts Center. Check out www.roadtheatre.org for info and tickets. The Road Theatre Company accepts the KCRW fringe benefits card for 2-for-1 admission.

Posted in theatre.

Tagged with , , , , , .


Review of THE KITCHEN PLAYS, 1 of 2: The Petoskey Stones

I was itching for some theatre yesterday and ended up swinging by the Historic Lankershim Arts Center in NoHo for the Road Theatre Company‘s Off-Road workshop production of THE KITCHEN PLAYS. The series consists of four one-act plays, all written, produced, and directed by company members, and all taking place on the same kitchen set. Different pairs of two are showing each performance night, so plan wisely; I was able to see THE PETOSKEY STONES and JIMMY JUMPS SUNNY SIDE UP. The remaining two plays are SMORGASBORD and PHANTOM TICKETS.

The Lankershim’s 99-seat space was a nice blend of the intimate theatre feel, yet allowing for a more sizable set than most small theaters. Though the physical set, a slice of the downstairs area of a house (dominated by, of course, the kitchen) stayed the same between one-acts, the designers were careful with the accouterments. Between plays, small but noticeable elements changed, including the photographs on the wall and the items around the kitchen and on the tables. Lighting and sound design also highlighted the changes in time and place between plays, effectively creating very individual settings from the same set.

THE PETOSKEY STONES, by Elizabeth Sampson, was a slow starter. The play opens with a scenelet of Gramma watching expressively out of the window towards the fourth wall. We discover shortly that this is the direction of the large lake by which the house sits, as various women begin entering and adding information. We learn that these are Gramma’s four granddaughters, varying in age from what I gathered was late twenties through perhaps early fifties, and that she has called them together to distribute some of her most treasured jewlery. The jewelry is not only monetarily valuable (the dialog describes gold, platinum, sapphires, and diamonds), but carry with them sentimental value in the form of stories involving two people missing from the table. Both Gramma’s husband and daughter (the grandfather and mother of the other women present), have recently died. After Gramma describes the jewelry, she exits on a desire to rest and leaves the granddaughters to decide between themselves which ring shall go to whom.

The opening was a little meandering. It felt as if the the expository material was trying too hard to replicate real conversation, which usually tends to fall flat in theatre. I had trouble getting engaged with a central storyline, a task which was made more difficult by the fact that there were several characters being introduced in a relatively short time, with no clear protagonist on whom to focus attention. This is, of course, what real life is like, and it gets dry very quickly on the stage. After Gramma’s exit, the granddaughters begin discussing the rings. Previously hidden personal tidbits surface, and we discover from these sisters that many of the issues surrounding their mother’s death were left unresolved between each other.

This was the catalyst moment I had been waiting for; and indeed, by the time it happened I was starting to wonder if it would happen at all. Once there was conflict and emotional investment in the lines, the play rapidly took off. The dialog moved away from trying to replicate life, at which theatre as a medium is quite mediocre, and more toward trying to make us think about life, which theatre does extraordinarily well. The result of the switch was a suddenly intriguing, interweaving set of personal stories about these sisters, and how their lives and relationship to each other had evolved over time. The struggle to incorporate their mother’s death into their shared experience became the central action of the play, enhanced by the individual issues each were facing in their lives right now.

June Sanders as Gramma displayed a clear grounding in crisp acting; it was a pleasure to watch her facial and physical expressions, present and true to the moment at all times. Nicole Farmer brought a very pleasing set of layers to the eldest sister, Ellen; the weight of her character’s modern worries is clear, but it only sometimes represses the bounding, energetic, curious, and intelligent young girl within, the part of her forever delighted by the wonder of the universe.

Stephanie Michels delivers an assured portrayal of Stacianne, the second sister; however, I felt that the moments of depth in her dialog were somewhat disjoint with the rest of her character. I actually blame this more on the writing than her acting; I believe her most beautiful lines, while eloquent, profound, and delivered well, are inconsistent with her character as exposed in the early parts of the play. If the intent was to provide a glimpse into an unexpected depth beneath Stacianne’s otherwise nonplussed attitude, then this should have been emphasized more clearly. The alternative recommendation would be to incorporate more elements of this depth earlier in the play. As it is, the character as written feels, in this specific sense only, half done.

Avery Clyde displayed fantastic control of her physical movement and expression when playing the third sister, Pamela. Her character ranged in emotion from barely contained excitement to heartbroken disappointment. This emotion came across to me only partially through vocal delivery; her expressive physical delivery could have covered the task completely if necessary.

Paris Perrault played the youngest sister, Julianne, well enough. Her acting delivered what it needed to deliver and did not distract from any other characters or the writing. For a young actress still building her experience, this is actually a positive comment; so many young actors find themselves in over their head, and when this is noticeable, it detracts from enjoyment of the rest. Perrault held her own and did not seem out of place with this cast, but delivered nothing exceptional. My major suggestion for improvement would be that her emotional changes were too rapid and surface-level; a more careful attention to the inner process of emotional transition would serve her well in my opnion.

Scott Allen Smith as director shows a nicely integrated feel for motion and physical space, which is in keeping with the style of acting brought out in some of my favorite character moments as described above. The visual that sticks in my memory is that of the four sisters, after a poignant moment of emotional explosion, diffused to the four points of the kitchen like a diamond, and each in their own characterization of frustration.

Overall, an enjoyable first act to the evening. I do intend to investigate more productions by this theatre company, as well as the NoHo area in general.

The Road Theatre Company’s THE KITCHEN PLAYS runs January 7 through the 29 at the Lankershim Arts Center.Check out www.roadtheatre.org for info and tickets. The Road Theatre Company accepts the KCRW fringe benefits card for 2-for-1 admission.

Stay tuned for Review 2/2: JIMMY JUMPS SUNNY SIDE UP.

Posted in theatre.

Tagged with , , , , , .


A Problem of Filtering

I wish to offer a counterpoint to my own post of some days ago, in which I posited that we Americans have reached a state of creative apathy. The plot of the movie “Idiocracy” seems closer and closer to real life  every day sometimes. But upon further reflection, I concede a plausible parallel explanation: it’s not that there are proportionally any more dumb people than before — it’s just that now they have an equal voice.

Modern technology (such as, among many others, this blog) has given the power of mass communication to pretty much anyone with an internet connection. While the benefits to this are many (consider the social impact of human rights organizations in Iran or China, as just one example), it also means that anyone looking for bonafide content is going to have to wade through a whole lot of crap, generated by people that any responsible content editor probably would have laughed at or outright slapped just a couple of decades ago.

Not only does the average person not have the time to sift through and verify every source in the new information economy, but the profusion of user generated content has led to an expectation that information should be free. The consequences of the first condition are that, indeed, perhaps on the whole our collective intelligence is dropping due to an almost necessary trust in unverified and unvetted sources (such as this one). Of the second condition, the consequences could be far direr.

From the perspective of the Creator of Genuine Content, be it an artist, journalist, writer, or purveyor of a particular geek culture, the modern world comes with three very nasty problems: 1) How does one reach the end user with a genuine product through the sea of commercialized crap and punditry? 2) How does one convince the layman end user, once reached, that the genuine content in question is actually preferable to the probably more entertaining crap and punditry? And finally, 3) How does one make any sort of living doing so, when the sea of crap is most likely free, promoting a product, or invisibly paid for in what was once private information?

In making small talk once with a  journalist/photographer from a local paper, while waiting on an interview with my theatre company, I asked how that particular individual had ended up at that particular news organization. “I went to journalism school,” he replied dryly, and added, “which was of course a waste of time, because I obviously should have been busy creating an extreme personality and pissing people off instead. Would have been better for my career.” I laughed at the sarcasm, but the point was soundly taken.  Where does the professional fit into the future of professional content? Recent efforts by certain online news sources to make users pay for content have largely just created annoyed users. Is the future of content to pay for everything indirectly through subconscious marketing and the data mining of private information?

As an amateur photographer, I know how hard it is to sell prints when anyone can get a stock image or graphical representation of basically anything for cheap or free on the web. When the relatively low cost of a modern SLR means that any middle class gadget nut can own semi-pro equipment without so much as cracking open a basic introduction to photographic technique, one would think the differences in artistic and creative talent would become more and more important as a differentiator. But when the masses don’t know how to appreciate the art, and moreover can’t be bothered to learn, the differences between amateur and pro are blurred. And if society slowly ceases to care about the difference, does that make the knowledge irrelevant?  Does it confine the “genuine” art to an isolated, individual experience?

As a theatre producer, I know how hard it is to convince the public to spend a few of their arts and entertainment dollars on the experimental stage, when modern movies (and, actually, many modern musicals) provide sensory overload and instantly understandable sequences of events which pass for plotlines. Film and television, while capable of striking visual effect and profound emotional impact, are in the general case providing a passive experience. Theatre is active, and requires thought and study in the moment of perception; therefore theatre, in general, requires more work from its audiences than the screen. And so it is often cast aside as boring by a new generation hungry for instantaneous gratification — for entertainment, in other words, not art. How will theatre, and the belief that art should make a people seriously think about themselves, survive in a world that seems loath to even have a voice conversation anymore?

Artistic talent and creative intellect are not dead.  In fact, they may be thriving underground during times such as these, when large current of social change are moving and conflicts rage both militarily and culturally.  But we live in an age where the purveyors of such content must actively find new ways of reaching society with what they produce, and doing so in a manner that is sustainable with respect to their ability to continue producing. And above all, they must stay relevant and engaging; or the Idiocracy we fear will indeed be closer than we think.

Posted in politics and society.


Prehistoric Beginnings of Modern Life

When picking up my race packet for my first half-marathon race a few months ago, one of the local running stores was selling a shirt bearing the phrase “we are because we run” and a stick figure chasing an antelope. Seeing that got me to thinking about the many facets of society and our very selves that is so influenced by our collective past.

Back to the shirt – thousands of years ago people hunted not with bows, arrows, spears, or any other implement, but by running down animals until they collapsed from exhaustion. This is reflected all over the human body: legs that act as springs to recover energy from each stride, posterior muscles that eliminate the need for a tail to maintain balance, and crucially: sweat glands that allow efficient heat rejection for long periods of time. Running truly is in our genome and while not the fastest of creatures, man is truly the king of endurance. This ancient need for running is reflected in modern times by widespread recreational running.

Taking a larger view, there is far more in our current society influenced by our prehistoric past than an affinity for destroying our knees. The early need to understand our surroundings has exploded into the manifold fields of science and philosophy, while the advantage in mastering our surroundings has blossomed into engineering. The picture isn’t all rosy though, mankind as we know it evolved in a set of circumstances very different than those today and we are left coping with a society we made for ourselves, but for which we are not made. This is particularly evident in the changing social connections we have. Where we evolved in a time of small tightly-knit groups our connections have exploded in the past hundred years (my writing here a prime example), a social change that biology simply can’t keep up with.

I’ll leave it there for now, lest I write about too many topics at once (plus I need to do some more research), but I’ll try to periodically update my ramblings on how early human history shapes and challenges us today.

Hmm, there appears to have been a mix of some actual science and philosophical musings here, so I’ll attempt some references for the science…

-Running: Here’s an article about human adaptations for running, I know I’ve run across a more technical paper about it, but don’t recall where.

-Some thoughts on the limitations of human evolution were conjured up after reading some of John Hawks’ writings on trends in human evolution (he’s a paleoanthropologist at UW Madison), getting from that article to some thoughts here is a couple of jumps which I’ll probably devote a post to later.

Posted in politics and society, science and engineering.