יום ראשון, 4 בדצמבר 2011

Technology, Technique and the confusing case of Barefoot Running


Being the primitivist nut that I am, I often indulge in activities which are perceived as doing things “the old way”. To keep things short and cliché-ish – I light fires by rubbing sticks together, I eat out of self-made wooden bowls and spoons, I twine my own cordage… oh yeah – and I run barefoot.

Why do I do it? There’re several different answers. For the most part, I like the feel of knowing where things come from… of doing things from scratch. I like the raw experience of having my humanity interact with its environment without any barriers, buffers or mediators. But it’s slightly different with barefoot running – That I do because it’s actually better than running with shoes.

And here it is: The thing that makes barefoot running such a confusing thing for most people. As fond as I am of ancient skills, I wouldn’t go saying (or thinking) that handdrill, bowdrill or even flint and steel are superior ways to get fire compared to, say, a Zippo lighter. With barefoot and minimalist running, however, I claim just that – that it’s definitely superior (less prone to injury and more effective) compared to running with the most branded and extensively designed sport-shoes.

Recent studies pretty much established that running barefooted promotes better running technique, reduces shock (and hence the chance of injury) and is more energy-efficient. All the while, running shoes fail to show improvement in injury rates, and generally promote “bad” running technique (heel strikes, harder landings, foot immobility, etc.).
Moreover, when you examine the construct and functions comprising running motion, just how incredible a machine our human body is. Doing so, one can’t help but appreciate the elaborate yet elegant ways in which our bare feet interact with the ground during a run.





But if so, then why is it so surprising to many that barefoot running is healthier and more effective than shod running? My answer is that this happens for the same reason why so many people who rush into barefoot running end up injuring (rather than helping) themselves. The reason is – they all think about barefoot running, and running is general, in terms of Technology. And looking at barefoot running in terms of Technology is a dangerous perceptual mistake.

It isn’t about Technology at all. Rather, it’s all about Technique.

Technique is the method of achieving a desired aim (Merriam-Webster). Technology, in its popular meaning (which is what I’m talking about here), refers to constructed designs and solutions which incorporate certain techniques to achieve a specified end. Being an aspiring anthropologist, who finds himself personally occupied with this specific phenomenon, I think the barefoot movement is highlighting a fascinating trend in modern-western culture: Its persistent preoccupation with Technology at the expense of Technique.
  
Probably affected by consumerist mindset, we’re used to solutions which come packed in nice little packages, and in which the underlying mechanics – the techniques – are invisible to us as users. We download and install apps, pop pills, utilize all kinds of gadgets, click buttons, we outsource and we hire “services”… thus enjoying the application of the required techniques without having to dwell on them too hard or for too long.

Then we come to running – a major functional operation of our bodies – and we approach it with the same mindset: We wear the clothes that will make us faster and more comfortable, we drink those sport-drinks that will get us going harder and further, and we buy those new revolutionized shoes that will obviously turn us into lean mean track machines. So quite unsurprisingly, when we hear “barefoot is better” – we’re either struck with awe and disbelief (because “how could these primitive hunks of raw meat possibly be better than the hi-tech state-of-the-art footwear that pros wear and coaches advertise?”), or we quickly throw off our shoes and fully embrace the new “solution” – unknowingly risking serious injury.

It would all be very different if we were to look at barefoot running as a matter of Technique…
When you consider the technique, you consider the raw process. You examine running not as something defined by gear or track (Technology) – but rather as a motion generated by yourself within a context, whatever it may be. Unlike the case of Technology – where our bodies are but rigid variables in a rigid equation – viewing running as a case of Technique turns us into fluid beings of change, whose goal is to transform the way we behave (not just muscle) in order to move optimally.

Barefoot Technology (a bare foot) doesn’t turn you into a cheetah. It isn’t an end, but is a means – a call to examine your connection to the ground on which you run and to transform yourself according to the feedback you receive. That’s what makes injury-free, stronger, faster athletes. That’s what the Cheetah intuitively knows, and what we’re only now re-learning.

And this is just the confusing case of barefoot running. Where else do we neglect Technique? What else does Technology make us see better, though not nearly as clearly?

תגובה 1: