Tag Archives: sport

In between

(One can’t be upset about the ways of academia all the time. I love working in academia, I love the freedom and the flexibility it gives you. Working at home, you can pretty much up and go whenever you please, and I like that. This post is about the products of those up-and-go moments.)

‘It’s running season’, I said to myself a couple of weeks back, checked my running gear, put on my heart rate monitor and those shoes and off I went. Every other day in between or after working in the home office, sometimes even two or three days in a row. Running is simply the bestest and those were really great times! I really enjoyed it. One drawback to running though was that I couldn’t take pictures any more the way I used to. It had been a habit of mine for many years to always carry a camera with me and it was strange at first to be running, let’s say, through gorgeous sunsets and not be able to capture the gorgeousness.

Now that I did my hip in and can’t run any more (very sad that but I am trying to see the silver lining in this cloud) I can do landscape photography again, yay! Here are my favourite recent pics, starting from when the fresh green leaves weren’t quite out yet to right now.

Sunset Bohnenländer See

Havel River in Briest. I went there with my granny and we had drank coffee in the sunshine.

These little houseboats, here going upstream towards their home harbour in Plaue/Brandenburg, are for rent! I want one!

A small pond in a boggy landscape on the outskirts of town. I discovered it by taking a path that I have never gone before - and that I would have never been able to run on (it was more of a deer track really).

Alder leaves. Pretty little things.

The Scottish hills

I haven’t been a mountaineer for a very long time at all but I must say, the Scottish hills are truly wonderful. They are quite manageable in terms of height most of the time (West Coast hills are a different story, of course) and friendly.

Here are a few of the best pics I took over the last two years. I told ya I was going to get sentimental!

Winter sun over Loch Muick

Buachaille Etive Mor and Lagangharb Hut, Glencoe

Ben Vorlich near Loch Earn

The Grey Corries, looking towards Aonach Mor

Beinn Alligin, Torridon

Loch Fannich and the Fannichs from Fionn Bheinn

Climbing and blue-berries near Clachnaben, Banchory

Glen Etive. I do really like the hills in the winter time; the days are much shorter, true, and even small walks can quickly become epic adventures when there’s snow involved. But seeing the sun glistening in the snow and hearing the snow crunch under the boot or crampon, and all around is still – there truly is nothing like it.

The sun sets over the bealach between Buachaille Etive mor and Buachaille Etive Beag

Whatever happened to Solitude?

Henry David Thoreau, in Walden, praises not only self-reliance and a certain practical ingenuity, but also solitude. “I never found the companion that was so companionable as solitude”, he says, and he continues:

A man thinking or working is always alone, let him be where he will. [...] The farmer can work alone in the field or the woods all day, hoeing or chopping, and not feel lonesome, because he is employed; but when he comes home at night he cannot sit down in a room alone, at the mercy of his thoughts, but he must be where he can “see the folks”, and recreate, and he thinks remunerate, himself for his day’s solitude; and hence he wonders how the student can sit alone in the house all night and most of the day without ennui and “the blues”; but he does not realise that the student, though in the house, is still in his field, and chopping in his woods, as the farmer in his, and in turn seeks the same recreation and society that the latter does, though it may be a more condensed form of it.

By this description, manual worker and student alike experience solitude during their working lives and try to make up for that by being social in their leisure time. (Note how the rules re punctuation have changed since Walden was first published in 1854 – commas were used much more widely then. Just an observation.) I think on the whole this is an accurate description. Most of us only get to see their loved ones in the evening and are relatively unconnected to co-workers – and thus in our own solitary little cocoon – during the day.

This is precisely where mountaineering always feels a bit strange. Most people I know go to the mountains to seek out solitude, even though they already have so much of it at work. Isn’t that a bit strange? I walked all by myself for many hours yesterday; the other walkers in the party had dispersed but even when we were still walking together everyone was wrapped in their own cocoon of silence. I don’t want to say anything clichéd like ‘walking along silently, I became one with my surroundings’, even though that would be true. It sounds nice, doesn’t it? But I find that intially at least, just like with Thoreau’s farmer who comes home and cannot stand to be alone with his thoughts, solitude is quite difficult to bear.

Generally speaking, solitude is something that is tolerated, but not enjoyed. It is the contextual condition of some sort of activity, such as work, but it isn’t anything to strive for in itself. Sitting somewhere all alone, and maybe even thinking about life in that situation, or else just doing some thinking – unthinkable! Only morbid people and philosophers would do that. I think we have something like a cultural imperative to be active at all times and not too reflective, unless, again, reflection is our job. There has to be a point to the things that we do, and sitting in solitude and not doing anything – because thinking doesn’t mean ‘doing’ – is ultimately pointless, or so it may seem.

The same can be said about our leisure pursuits in general: They have to involve activity, and most of them actually require the presence of other people, too. Being busy is a moral good, being lazy and physically inactive is sinful. This may be a crude generalisation but I think it’s not too far off either. Thoreau didn’t have to worry about any of these things; the activity hype started way after his time, and being part of a vibrant intellectual movement he wasn’t the only one to praise solitude. Other transcendentalists called for it, in fact, as did the German Romantics, because one could only find oneself, or one’s self, in the confrontation with solitude.

Imagine, then, that you’re high up in the mountains, about 2 hours away from the hut which is also in the mountains, meaning: You’re really in the midst of the mountains. All of a sudden the direction of the wind changes, the wind speed increases markedly, the clouds get dark and menacing. Because you planned to climb up 400 meters to reach the top of a mountain at around 1.000 m and because the wind speeds up there would blow you right off the hill and into the glen, you decide to seek shelter and wait out to see if the weather improves again. You find a few big rocks, you nestle in them, put on extra layers, pull the hood deep down, and wait.

Knees pulled up to your chin, hands in gloves, backpack close by – huddled up you sit there and look out into the mountains. And wait. The clouds are pushing each other over the mountains tops, eager to fling themselves down into the glen one after the other, and from where you’re sitting it looks like a waterfall of clouds. That’s how fast the wind drives the air. It is soooooo loud around you that even though you’re there all by yourself it is far from silent. The hills are roaring. Then comes the rain, the driving rain. Still you sit there looking out from underneath your hood, still hoping that it might only be a passing shower. But how long can you wait like this?

40 minutes fly by, 40 minutes of only sitting and looking and thinking. 40 minutes of enforced solitude. Would anyone seek this out? Being alone in the mountains, sitting there and looking out? I don’t think so. ‘The mountains aren’t there to be looked at’, someone is bound to point out. ‘You have to experience them’, meaning ‘you have to actively experience them’, of course, like ‘you have to be doing something’. Sitting in the midst of a storm is a good experience, I would counter. But then so is simply sitting there, as well. Perhaps mountaineers are the least likely to ever do that because they’re actually fit enough to run up and down mountains all day long. But I was grateful for the enforced solitude in the shelter, and also for the solitary hours the day after.

Did I find myself though in the way that Thoreau & Emerson and Goethe & Schiller envisaged the experience of nature? I don’t know. Having all my thoughts to myself and being able to do what I want I probably followed my own inclinations a bit more in terms of what features in the landscape I focused on and what I subsequently thought about them. I also took time to take pictures where I would normally try to keep up with the group. I walked at my own pace, too, which is very important. I played with a tadpole in a puddle for a while. I even wanted to sit around lazily for a little bit, simply because I could, but midges prevented that.

I altogether came out of it the same person but with a new kind of experience of myself. I think that’s what solitude did for Thoreau too, and what it can do for anybody.

Reflections on the Cairngorms

I crossed the Cairngorms yesterday, from South to North. Even though these are sort of my ‘home mountains’, this was the first time I have ever been in the Cairngorms, and to walk right through the heart of them to the other side was very special. It took nine hours at a steady but leisurely pace, with frequent stops for checking the map and the compass (for this was part of my mountain navigation training). The route that me and my friend had selected went over Ben Macdui which is the second-highest peak in Britain. There were a few showers in between but that was ok.

The Cairngorms are interesting mountains; the only word I can think of to describe them is ‘FAT’. Yes, they are fat mountains, from the top anyway. This is because the tops are mostly weathered and form huge, rounded plateaus that look a bit like the backs of gigantic fat creatures too lazy to move much. It’s easy to get lost on these plateaus, especially when visibility is poor, and to wander off over a cliff, which is why we did the navigation exercise there: If you can navigate in the Cairngorms where there are fewer landmarks to go by, you can pretty much navigate anywhere.

Fat, lazy, quiet, big mountains they are with impressive gorges cutting right through them. As my friend said, these mountains powerfully exude the fact that they have been here for ages and that they will be here for ages once we are gone. I don’t know, I think that’s strangely comforting; it’s good to know that what is good will endure.

Perhaps it is a bit odd that the mountains should be loaded with so much meaning. But for me and my friend who is also in academia being out there in the hills was very meaningful. It puts things in perspective, it helps you see that all the trouble at work, all the fighting, strategising, game-playing, face-on/face-off sort of interaction and competing in the name of a career might maybe not be worth it. That life can be much simpler and much more enjoyable. That it’s possible to be happy with very few things, or that it’s worth fighting for what one knows to be right.

Granted, I brought all these thoughts and intentions to the Cairngorms, they didn’t infuse me with them. But being so small amidst these fat, lazy hills has a humbling effect. It really does make you wonder why we always take ourselves so seriously in the name of something, and why that often means that we’re not kind to each other.

Strange (and sentimental) though it might seem, there was more of a human touch in these wonderful, quiet mountains than amongst so many people that I see every day.

I am sure that my pictures can’t capture any of this and my words probably don’t make much sense either. So I say: Go out there and see for yourself. (Take waterproofs with you, and perhaps you should have one person in the party who knows how to move in the mountains.)

The German dream is over

Now I’ve written quite a bit about the different teams in the World Cup – well, actually, I’ve mainly reflected in issues with the English team who seem to have this inner conviction that, since they are inherently great, they must win all the matches. When they didn’t, they were flabbergasted and struck speechless. Not so much the British media though which was hostile, talked about the bad atmosphere in the camp, the horrible coach and all that.

So: Germany lost yesterday and I was wondering this morning how the German media deals with this. I can’t really make a full comparison but here is my first impression:

The Germans are really sad about loosing against the Spanish team which was, so the Berliner Zeitung claims, clearly the better team. The German team though, so everyone agrees, played really, really well in this tournament. That’s probably why the Berliner Zeitung is lenient with Kroos who had a chance to score a goal in the 70th minute. The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung says ‘the loss was deserved but it doesn’t mean the German team failed’. The kind of football the Germans played is lovingly referred to as ‘youthful, imaginative and conquering’ (the hearts? the opponent’s goal? Definitely both.). The Sueddeutsche Zeitung in Munich is a bit less moderate and mature in tone but that’s because their own local star, Thomas Mueller, wasn’t allowed to play. ‘If he had’ve played, we still may have been able to turn this around’, the SZ says. People in Munich are really cut up.

All in all it seems people are sad but content about how well their team played. And I must say, I am impressed by this sort of tone. The openness, the lack of hostility!! Wonderful, all things considered. But the situation is a completely different one in Germany to begin with: the notion that one should win because one is inherently better than others, well, this sort of thinking is never drummed into Germans. The exact opposite is the case. The team was a good one, that’s what the media seem to focus on and what German people are proud of. Even my mum (watch out, anecdotal evidence!): she recently told me everyone’s ages – because this was a very young team – and where they had played before and about the coach and all…and we don’t even like football! (Oops. Yes, it’s true.) So it’s the quality of the team and how well the individual players in it worked together which mattered to folks back home. And isn’t that what counts in sport?

…and don’t mention the War!

A few days ago I ranted – or rather reflected – on the nature of internal racism between Scotland and England which is an old hat especially if you’re in Scotland: everyone here knows that many English consider themselves superior. Not all of them, but many, and Scots are generally hostile to that sort of uppity attitude (and good on them too). This causes considerable grief to a lot of innocent young English folk who come up North and are disliked and disrespected purely because of their nationality. There’s research to confirm that anti-English sentiment is indeed quite strong in certain places, much to the surprise of said innocent young persons who simply cannot understand what’s so awful about being English. Because of some historical event that happened, like, 800 years ago? What, are they nuts, those Scottish people?

Yeah, right. English kids declared this morning, on national television (bless BBC Breakfast!), that they are not sure which team will win the football match tonight but they are quite sure which team they dislike: Germany. Though the German team certainly played really well and was pure enjoyment to watch (they didn’t say this but I know that’s what they meant)…Asked by the reporter if this means that they will root for Germany, the kids with shock-horror expressions of their faces burst out “No way! Never. Never ever. We’d never support Germany.” Why not? “Because my granddad fought in the wars and what he told me about it…[exhale, concerned look] it’s just too horrible. I could never support Germany.” An alternative answer was “can’t support them because of 1966.” This is football lore and quite boring if you’re not that interested in football (but here’s the link anyway) – but if you are, then you know what went down in 1966 and I don’t need to remind you.

“Two World Wars and one World Cup,” is how England’s crueller fans might sum it up.

So there’s complete incomprehension in England at Scotland’s historically based stance of rejection against England whilst at the same time Germany is generally disliked for…er…historical reasons. Hmm, is it just me or does it look like whatever transpires, England must come off great? England must prevail, yes? But why? I’m sorry but a nation that is truly great, well, wouldn’t it win all the cups and beat all the other nations? Isn’t that why any nation would be considered great in sport? But that’s not happening with England, and reverting to hypocrisy doesn’t make it any better.

Internal racism

I was a bit surprised this morning about BBC Breakfast; I mean I have been told by a former English friend a few years back that ‘to be honest, we English people do think that we’re better than Scots…not sure why, we just are.’ But to hear TV presenters repeat the very same thing on national television? What they said was:

Yesterday, Andy Murray was claimed to be an Englishman with English ancestors and years of residence in England and all that. He’d been promoted to that as it were. Today, he is just a Scotsman. [The presenter laughs.]

Hm…I had thought that this ex-friend of mine had been arrogant but now I realise that she was just an ordinary English girl. She was absolutely in line with what is the established, if not very often acknowledged practical truth in England. I find that deeply problematic and I don’t even know where to start. For a start, how shoddy is it to claim ethnic superiority for one nation within the geopolitical unit and to thereby put the other nations down? That’s got to hurt said nations which isn’t exactly desirable in terms of national unity, is it? Secondly, why do it so super obviously? It’s the openly admitted arbitrariness (well, actually there’s nothing arbitrary about it at all) of assigning the English label (‘good’) or the Scottish one (‘bad’) depending on what the situation is.  This is also a put-down. Thirdly, isn’t it unbelievable that the Conservative Party claims to be the ‘primary Unionist party’ when the membership is also overwhelmingly English and the general outlook of the Party therefore cannot be in favour of Scotland at all?

I don’t know, I mean the whole anti-English-sentiment-in-Scotland discourse is a bit blown up at times; I think the English media, especially when they are Conservative-leaning, mobilise this discourse to justify and at the same time somewhat cover up their racial snobbery.  It’s not as bad in Scotland as some newspaper reports make it out. At the same time – the English clearly think that Scots are an inferior race/ethnic group.

I have often hoped that all of this was just some sort of misunderstanding on my part and that we could all be a happy family together, with me, the German girl, in the middle even! Alas…

Well, here’s to the new government and the Queen, and long live brave Caledonia!

England is burdened

I listened with great interest to the BBC Breakfast discussion about the English football team this morning. Why did they get thrashed so badly by Germany when England actually doesn’t have such a bad team? How come they play well in all other games but then, when it counts, in the World Cup, that’s when they can’t pull it off? ‘The mood was bad in the camp’, commented one former player wisely. ‘For the last fifty years or so, they always look scared the moment they run out onto the field’, said another one.

Why are England’s players scared? And what of, if?

Bundesarchiv, Bild 183-N0716-0314 / Mittelstädt, Rainer / CC-BY-SA

Well, here’s my take on it: What happened petty much fifty years ago? Britain lost its Empire, right. Ever since then, several institutions are tacitly responsible for retaining what’s left of British greatness. (I’ll go into the British greatness tradition in detail some other time, it’s really interesting.) Now Michael Billig talked about ’90-minute-nationalism’, i.e. the feeling of national pride that football fans experience during a match; this is definitely going on with English football, but there is more. The twist lies in that English fans expect a confirmation of how great their nation is. The players’ individual or team qualifications don’t count in an of themselves, they are mere pegs to the feeling of British greatness.

If England won on the international stage, a feeling of imperial British greatness would be restored.

The media are part and parcel of the lusting for imperial greatness and come down on an unsuccessful English team like a ton of bricks. No wonder the players seem scared when they walk out onto the field: they are scared, of their own people and of how harsh they will be treated if they lose. They are burdened, almost crushed with completely unreasonable expectations, unreasonable because for a start, the British Empire is gone and no one will be able to restore it in any way whatsoever. (That’s sad, yes. America is the Head Boy now. Tough.) But secondly, the Englanders simply aren’t that good at football anyway.

And they’re a bunch of sissies; no sense of moderation or realism when it comes to what sports can do for a nation and what it can’t do. And they’re also a bit mean in all that lusting to have the Empire back : Other nations are pretty dependent on sporting successes too, e.g. New Zealand, and yet the New Zealand media don’t trash their rugby players after a defeat.

Because New Zealanders aren’t sissies. Needless to say: neither are Germans.

What I like most about rock-climbing

I’ve been rock-climbing four times now and I really, really like it. Here is what I like most about it:

  • The tap-tap-tap sound of the rubber of the shoes on flat rock as you approach the climb – it sounds so cute.
  • The slowness of preparing and actually climbing too, at least for me, contrasted with the adrenaline rush of getting into a tight spot and being quite scared and nervous all of a sudden.
  • The solitude of belaying – because you stand there by the side of the sea cliff (or wherever, but I’ve been climbing on sea cliffs) and feed the rope more or less mechanically to the lead climber. This gives you plenty of time to listen to your thoughts while you’re watching the sea swelling and falling. Beautiful.
  • The natural gracefulness of moving on rock. It’s not always graceful but it feels good.
  • Being out in sun and wind but not rain – because the rock gets too slippy when it’s wet.
  • The added extra of spotting whales from the top of the cliffs!

There are few things that aren’t so great about climbing.

Falling is one of them. It’s not very nice to fall backward off a cliff even if you’re instantly caught on the rope and even though you don’t actually fall, you only come off the wall really without changing position very much. Still, I find that nerve-wrecking and I want to get better at climbing quickly so that I don’t have to experience that quite so much. Thanks to my new rock shoes (see picture – aren’t they pretty?) I should be able to stick to the rock better in future.
The other thing that isn’t so great is climbing when it’s cold; the hands hurt like hell by the time you get to the top.

This is what I want to be able to do one day:

Copyright by Diuturno