I decided to play hooky yesterday; with both the kids in some sort of summer camp, my wife and I headed out for a rare day together and the prospect of uninterrupted conversation. She's been jonesing to see Away We Go so off we went.

Although the theater left much to be desired, we enjoyed the movie. Burt (John Krasinski) and Verona (Maya Rudolph) are unexpectedly expecting their first child. Their current residence, a ramshackle house with inadequate heating, was chosen for its close proximity to Burt's parents. But Burt's parents announce their intent to move, and Burt and Verona embark on a journey with the intent of finding a place to settle and start their family.

It's a quirky film with quirky characters--perhaps a bit too quirky--that points a lens toward that searching feeling most of us have had at one time or another. Am I doing the right things? Am I in the right place? Am I headed in the right direction? Am I doing everything I can with my life? Unfortunately, these questions have no answers, or rather, have answers that reveal themselves in retrospect only.

Most of us are trained to think life has certain check-boxes and deadlines, and if we make the right plan and fill them in we will achieve fulfillment and happiness. Once embroiled in the actual process of living, however, we are quickly disabused of the notion that life can be planned. One of my favorite lines is from the movie U-Turn: "Nothing makes the Great Spirit laugh like a man’s plans."

We all imagine being safe and secure and not having to deal with anything sad or difficult. It's just a dream, however, and one that can never be realized. Life and all that it entails is hard and complicated and no amount of seeking will ever reveal a place where it's not. Nevertheless, it's the human condition to strive. It is also the human condition to wonder if what we have is really what we want.

In its representation of archetypes, the movie is one of extremes, but not so much that they ruin the story. I think most people will recognize the characteristics on display, if not the characters themselves. Burt and Verona are too centered, too self-contained, more selfish than they think, and perhaps a bit smug without even realizing it.

If you enjoy movies such as American Beauty (also directed by Mendes), Lost in Translation, or Adaptation, you'll probably be a good fit for Away We Go.

Sarah Palin's resignation--obviously not anything you haven't already heard about. The amazing thing is that millions of people thought (and probably still think) she was a good candidate to be vice president. Amazing.

Even more ludicrous is that she'll go on to make millions with her book(s) and guest appearances and, I even read, a potential TV show.

Only in America.

Added:

I suppose I owe my readers a more in-depth editorial, but I' not sure how much effort this is worth. It seems pretty straight forward to me. McCain's picking Palin was a Hail Mary pass in an attempt to appeal to a demographic he had no influence with, that being middle-aged white women. He figured he already owned the white mail demo and thus didn't need to bolster it (by choosing, say... Romney), and he thought Palin would bring in the votes he needed to push him over the top.

Perhaps a rational decision at the time: Palin looks good on paper. At first blush, she seemed young, articulate, smart and tough. Also a Pro-Lifer, a positive as far as the Republicans are concerned, since there are some people in this nation who simply won't vote for someone who is Pro-Choice. Son in the Army headed to Iraq, mother of five, including a disabled child, member of the NRA.... She's also very attractive, and there's no denying the power of a pretty face in the U.S. of A. She has a compelling story; small town Mom makes good. She's Every Woman (more on that later).

But maybe they should have interviewed her a little more before tossing her the slot. Once she opened her mouth, it was pretty much all downhill, at least with those voters who exercise a modicum on rationality when it comes to choosing their team. There was also some contradiction coming out of the gate. The RePubs had been bashing on Obama's lack of experience, and Palin, despite their protestations, had even less. Then there's the pregnant teen-age daughter--despite Palin's record of promoting abstinence as opposed to sex education. She's been associated with the Alaska Independence Party, which wants Alaska to secede, and attends a church that can most kindly be described as being on the fringe.

And then came the lunacy of her interviews. She came across as more than incoherent. It was as though she lived in a fantasy world. Her responses were so idiotic, Saturday Night Live was able to lift them whole for Tina Fey's comedic skits.

Lastly, referring back the the Every Woman role they planned for Palin to fill, which was a big tactic of the McCain's campaign. We don't want elitists! We want someone just like you! The message they sent was if you were educated and thoughtful, you were an elitist. Boo! Down with education! Down wirth rational discourse! Down with thoughtfulness! Boo!

Do we really want someone who represent the 'average' American as President or Vice President. I run into average American's all the time. They can't get my order at McDonald's right. They tailgate me when I'm already going 10 over. They can't count change. They can't point out Iraq on a map. The average American on the street is overweight, uneducated, irrational and confident that they are the smartest person walking. One of the stalwart signs of incompetence is the inabliity to recognize it in yourself. I can't speak for you, but personally I want someone educated, thoughtful and rational as president.

Maybe now with her resignation, we can hope we've seen the last of her. I doubt it though. Soon her book with be on the best seller racks and we'll be seeing her all over the daytime talk shows pimping it. She'll be laughing all the way to the bank.

Maybe she's not so stupid after all....

For most of my adult life, I've suffered from some degree of back pain, ranging from mild to almost debilitating. I've tried pretty much everything to resolve it with varying degrees of success, none of it lasting. I have this discomfort in spite of (because of?) a thus far life-long devotion to exercise, mainly weight training and 2-3 sessions of running per week at 2 miles or so per session, just enough to keep up the cardiovascular aspect of my fitness.

In the course of recent research on the net related to reducing back pain, I came across a number of articles (example: Heel vs. Midfoot vs. Forefoot: How do elite runners land?) postulating that we'd trained ourselves (or rather our shoes had trained us) to walk incorrectly. The gist: when babies first start walking without shoes, they land on the ball of the foot with the leg slightly flexed. Then, when we put shoes on them, the inflexibility of the shoe forces a heel to toe pattern that overcomes the natural forefoot strike and we end up walking that way the rest of our lives.

While a forefoot strike maximizes the structure of the foot as a natural shock absorber, a heel strike transmits the force directly up through the leg, hip and lower back. It's this repeated shock that is a major contributor to knee, hip and lower back pain. Over time, and in an attempt to soften the shock of the heel strike, shoes have become increasingly shock-absorbent and supportive. Too supportive, some new experts are saying, so much so that this excess cushioning and support prevents our feet and lower legs from developing an adequate level of structural and muscular strength. As a result, our feet function ever less efficiently, our joint and back pain becomes worse, and we move to even more cushioning and supportive shoes--and even orthopedics--in an ever-descending spiral.

The way to walk, these new experts claim, is to shorten the stride, keep the hips over the feet as much as possible, and to land on the ball of the foot with the heel striking second. This method uses the foot and lower leg as nature intended--natural shock absorbers to minimize impact.

Armed with this new found knowledge, I started paying attention to the way I walked. I discovered I was already doing the forefoot strike when I walked barefoot on hard surfaces (and I bet you do too) since walking with a heel strike was uncomfortable. As is my pattern, I threw myself into reconfiguring my walking/running all the time. There are several companies offering shoes designed for "natural" walking--shoes with minimal support and padding and a flat sole. It's very difficult to practice the forefoot strike in shoes that have a thick heel (like running shoes).

I ordered a pair of black loafers from Terra Plana. Despite the flat sole and lack of padding and support, I found them to be fairly comfortable... as long as I walked forefoot first. Since running caused much discomfort, I worked on changing my strike there as well, but found it difficult to do wearing my traditional Nike Air Pegasus running shoes. Enter the Vibram Five Fingers....

In my research I ran across some blog posts extolling the virtues of these shoes (and the virtues of barefoot running). Despite the price (at around $80 for the Classic, they were more than I'd spent on my running shoes), I decided to give them a try. I was very excited when they arrived and was anxious to try them out.

After some struggle getting them on, I set out on my first run. As I mentioned above, I typically go 2 miles, taking about 20 minutes to do so. Certainly not a race pace, but fast enough to get the heart rate up and long enough to take the requisite 20 minutes of cardio. Armed (or footed) with my new Five Fingers, off I went. I wasn't planning to run my usual route. I knew I needed to build up foot strength and get used the the VFFs, so I decided I'd start with mile and work up.

By half a mile, I had hot spots on my feet, and by the time I completed my mile, my feet were hurting pretty badly from the shoes. Not the running with no support or padding, but the shoes themselves. The hot spots and irritation were focused as in the image below. I even had a couple of blisters starting.

I knew it would take some time to get used to shoes, so I didn't give up immediately. I used the shoes the next 2 times I ran, then admitted defeat. My feet just hurt too bad--not from the running, but from the Five Fingers shoes. I tossed them in the trunk and began running in the same wresting shoes I wore in the gym. Minimal padding, flat sole, no blisters... all was good. My feet had adapted to the barefoot run, forefoot striking felt natural now, and, yes, my lower back pain had diminished considerably.

Life proceeded, and then I read Tim's post on his Five Fingers experience. He suggested Baby Powder of Vaseline for the hot spot areas. Had I given up too soon? I got the Five Fingers out of the trunk to give it another go. This time I gave it a full three weeks. I started out at a mile and experienced the same hot-spot and blister problem as before. I gritted my teeth. If they worked for Tim they'd work for me. Three days a week, slowly tying to extend back up to my normal 2 miles. The result?

I'm back in my wrestling shoes.

My feet did get tougher, but despite thick ridges of callous building up in the areas indicated on the image above, the Five Fingers were just too uncomfortable. A few times I found myself far enough out and, not wanting to endure the Five Fingers any more, pulling them off and finishing my run barefoot. Despite my failure to adapt to the Five Fingers, I learned two things to help guide your buying decision, should you decide to give the Five Fingers a try:

1. The Five Fingers Classic model (pictured at the top right of the post) isn't suited for running in wet weather. Water doesn't drain out of them and your feet end up slipping and sliding inside the shoe. I think one of their models is a water model. If you're going to be running in wet weather, you should give those a look.
2. The Classic is also not suited to cross country. Most of my running is on hard surfaces (road and sidewalk) but there are opportunities to go across some grassy/dirt/sandy areas. With its open top design, the Classic was vulnerable to stuff getting inside them. I had to stop more than once to remove a twig or leaf or pebble that had flipped up and gotten inside the shoe.

While the Five Fingers didn't work for me, changing my foot strike and walking/running in flat soled shoes with no padding or support has. I still have lower back pain, but it's not nearly at the level it was before. Previously, I'd say on a 1-10 I averaged around a 6-7 on the discomfort scale. Now I put myself at a 2-3. That's a significant difference, and huge increase in my quality of life.

For anyone interested in looking at this walking option as a solution for their own aches and pains, the New York Magazine article You Walk Wrong is a great place to start.