Why I Don't Like Running

The answer isn't "because it sucks."

Even though it kinda does.

So in primary school I used to be a lot more active because I was a small child, and small children are like miniature nuclear reactors and if they don't expel copious amounts of energy they explode and kill anyone in a 10m radius. Somehow, despite being like every other kid who runs around, I got fatter than others (I've naturally fixed that now). So despite my efforts not to irradiate my neighbourhood with Smallchildium 245 I just wasn't very good at it. But sometimes things can be fun even if you're not good at them, right? Right.

Well running is compulsory in school. PE classes demand that I embarrassingly participate in sports regardless of aptitude. That would just be a distant unpleasant memory but they didn't just make it compulsory but competitive.

Every year there's a sports carnival where everyone is forced to compete in multiple events and most of all: running. It isn't just a bad class for the entire school, it is a spectator event for everyone's parents to come out and cheer on their kids and film it for prosperity on VHS tapes they've long since stashed away in some chest in the back of the closet along with their only semi-working VHS player they'll uncover one day and relive all the horribly low-quality nostalgia. Thing is, I know I suck. My parents know I suck. My classmates know I suck. Why are you forcing me to show off how much I suck in front of their entire school and their relatives? It didn't motivate me to get better at running, it only made me want to hide whenever it was Sports Day...

Forced competition isn't good for self esteem, especially when you know you're going to lose. See, the only person who really benefits from a school-wide competition is the people who know they're going to win and no one else's parents really need to be there to film it. I suppose you could congratulate the middle kids on their "hard work and effort. It's good that you tried" but when you're so bad and embarrassed in front of hundreds of people "you tried" doesn't give a positive reinforcement about effort it just makes trying seem pointless and leaves a negative association.

I have two 2nd place ribbons. Each one is a slap in the face.

Because an entire year group can't run one on one race track at the same time we had divisions based on skill. I believe I was in E division. That is the worst one. I won those ribbons in year 6 and 7. Coming 2nd doesn't really mean much to a person if there's only two people in the race including yourself (year 6). The next year I one-up'd myself and managed to actually beat someone in a race of 3. Problem is that kid had had heart surgery a few years back... I had only just beaten him.

I don't remember which race it was but at one point I was just so far behind, struggling, tired, and humiliated by the fact that the race had basically finished already and every second I spent running was just another one where every scream and cheer was directed at me. Everyone was looking at me fail and I didn't take it well. I stopped. I couldn't do it. I'd already lost, why even bother to run those last 15 metres?

There wasn't one. I still can't think of a reason.

They didn't let me live that down until I graduated and moved onto highschool where no one remembered it had ever happened.

Competing in general isn't pointless... as long as you have some basic skill in what you're doing. I knew I wasn't good at sports. I had little co-ordination, I wasn't very fit, and I hated doing things in front of others. The idea of enforcing sports into schools is probably now firmly embedded because we're trying to teach kids to be physically active and healthy and that's good... but the way the entire idea is enforced is terrible. It praises the naturally athletic and it humiliates the pudgy and emotionally insecure. Every year I'd be forced to compete. I tried so hard not to be part of it because every single year it just drilled into my brain: you are a loser. Every single one of your peers is better than you. You suck.

Maybe... just maybe... I'd be a fitter person and enjoy sports so much more if only they hadn't forced me to do it in school. Running made me hate myself and gave the other kids a quantifiable measure to make me feel inferior to them.

In highschool these sports carnivals were less enforced. As the years went by I managed to get out of more and more events until I didn't compete at all and took the day as a day off. The less I competed in sporting events I knew I couldn't do well in the more I started liking myself as a person.

I don't hate all sports, even though I generally don't want to do them these days. Team sports were fun because I wasn't singled out and ridiculed. I could participate and it wasn't me losing it was the team losing. No one pointed and laughed me afterwards if the team lost. I didn't have to be good I just needed to contribute. I liked team sports...

But running is one of the worst things that ever happened to me as a child and it took me years to recover from the emotional pain it put me through...

Art Gallery Adventures

I went to the Art Gallery a while ago with a friend. I didn't plan to, in fact I didn't plan on spending more than a few minutes with them in the city because I was giving them back their external harddrive. But as we sat talking I looked at the Art Gallery and was moved by a sudden burst of impromptu need to relive childhood memories I could no longer grasp clearly in my head. We embarked on what could potentially be a nostalgic adventure armed with 3 years of Arts Major learning and a mindset moulded to fit.

I expected to walk in and see something artsy-fartsy and start raving about "the elegant simplicity in the brush strokes" and finding deep and meaningful symbolism that just wasn't there in a self-mocking parody of Arts Major discourse. Instead I discovered a few things: some abstract art is really cool. Some abstract art is so bad it infuriates me. And art galleries make you feel like you're in a library for upperclass people.

Seriously. You walk in and there is a shift in volume like someone has grabbed the knob and turned it way down. There were no signs that said "quiet", there was no previous set of rules or a social guideline that told me I was obliged to be quiet (and how would I know if there was anyway? I don't visit these sorts of places), there was no people watching me to shhh me if I spoke too loudly. There was just this sudden unconscious need to emulate the quietness of the building and whisper my praise or criticisms near my friend so they could hear.

Some abstract art is really cool. There was one piece that was a "self portrait" but there was no person in it. Instead it was of a cello. Well, I have met some talented cellos in my time but none that could wield a paintbrush with that skill. That was really fascinating that the artist had taken the idea of a "self portrait" to be shown in a different way. Instead of representing the physical aspects of who they were they emphasised the ideas, interests, and thoughts that make that person who they are. In this case they were a fan of playing the cello (other things were painted around and behind it but I can't remember what they were).

Some abstract art is awful.

Ralph Balson infuriates me. His artwork is just awful. It is a bunch of squares and circles with bland colours painted onto canvas. They're not even very good squares and circles. They're not well done enough to look good, but the edges aren't rough or curved enough to be deliberately or aesthetically interesting. It was literally the worst thing I'd seen in the art gallery. I was offended by how stupid it was. It was so distinctly bad that I saw another painting by his and didn't even read the name to know it was his.

Now I don't want you to think I hate abstract expressionism. It is not awful in of itself, but Ralph Balson is basically the kind of artist that makes people look at modern art and think "That's stupid, even I could do better than that" and they might be right. Which is really sad.

For example:

Right next to one was something that looked like it had required equal effort, but was far better. It looked like you could see a fish in its jumbled mess of colours and lines, or maybe a flower. That had meaning. That had aesthetic beauty. That was at least painted properly.

So in a video I will be making soon I decided one of the jokes could involve abstract art. Not a cruel one I assure you. So I sat down and I made some bad art with some paint my Dad had kept since he was in Year 8 (he's nearly 50 now) and painted random things. Didn't even go in with a plan for most. And I showed them to people and they liked them.

"No no!" I cried "You're meant to hate it! It's awful! I didn't even try!"

"But I really like them. They look cool."

I got told they could see my art being hung in an art gallery which saddened me.  It had literally taken me 5 minutes of effort tops on some of those paintings and people thought they were good. Only my brother told me they were awful and stupid but he doesn't care about anything.

So what if Ralph Balson was me? What if someone out there is like me only they're taking the joke too far? What if the world of Abstract Expressionism is just people out there making fun of themselves by painting random stuff and calling it "art" and laughing as it sells then going home and shaking their head in disbelief? What if people don't actually care and it really is just all a joke?

"I honestly thought if I tried doing this I'd die poor..." they say to themselves. "I mean, who even BUYS art these days?"

That'd be horrifying.

Let's all be abstract painters and never have to do a proper days work in our lives. Though admittedly most of us will die from starvation if we try but I'm sure some of us will make it.