I say “gave in” because I definitely didn’t want to read it.
My mom practically made me. Every time I talked to her, she would mention it.
“Oh, you have to read
it,” she would say. “You just have
to. It’s soooooo interesting, and he’s such a good writer. I think every runner
should read it. Really, they should. Blah, blah, blah…”
I kept telling her no, I wasn’t interested in reading about
some weird old dude who lived with a tribe of secretive Indians in the Mexican
wilderness. I had much better things to do. Like shred old bank documents. Or
alphabetize my spice cabinet.
In all honesty, I didn’t know much about the book other than
its reputation as the catalyst of the minimalist running craze—which is exactly
why I refused to read it.
By now, most of you are aware of my aversion to minimalism.
It just seems ridiculous to me that anyone would choose a structureless,
cushionless, laceless rubber foot glove—or worse, no footwear at all—over a
shoe that was scientifically engineered specifically for running.
It seems even more ridiculous that anyone would completely
abandon the footwear they have been running in their whole life as the result
of one stupid little book. And yet, people all over the country have done just
that—all because of Chris McDougall and his “Bible of Minimalism.”
My mom finally managed to pawn her copy off on me. It went
straight to the bottom of the stack of reading material on my nightstand—beneath
even the four-month-old issues of Us Weekly
that had been passed down from my grandma, to my aunt, to my cousin, to my
other cousin, to my mom and then to me. (Hey, I’m not going to pay for that
crap. But I will read it. Don’t judge me.)
Eventually, my stash of fine literature shrank down to
reveal the novel that I had somehow grown to despise without reading a single
line. I sighed and picked it up.
Ok, McDougall. I
thought. Let’s see what you’ve got.
My mom was right about one thing—he’s a fantastic writer. So
fantastic, in fact, that I almost got sucked right into believing that I could
run hundreds of miles in leather sandals eating nothing but corn mush.
The guy definitely did his research, and the science he
presented was pretty dang convincing. All that stuff about Achilles tendons and
glute muscles and heat regulation? Genius! He was clearly on to something.
Maybe humans really did evolve as the greatest distance runners on Earth.
But any goofball with a journalism degree knows that it’s
easy to prove a point when you include only the facts that back it up. (Or just
make up your own, right Dan Rather?) The difficulty lies in constructing a
balanced story that takes all sides into account.
So here’s the deal, McDougall: I buy your argument that we
evolved as runners. But I think a more balanced approach to this argument would
have at least mentioned the fact that our habitats have changed — and
diversified — substantially since the dawn of humankind.
I mean, I hate to be that loud, politically incorrect friend
who makes everyone else uncomfortable, but have you ever noticed how much you
don’t look like a Tarahumara Indian? Or a Kenyan? Or a Kalahari Bushman?
Maybe some people are
born with all of the equipment they need to run for hours on end, but they
probably don’t have ancestors who rode horses and ate inbred livestock.
What I’m trying to say is, humans might be born to run, but
we are born to run unequally. And some of us are born to run in gel soles.
To put it in perspective, I have created the following
series of charts displaying the changes in human lifestyles over time, both for
the Tarahumara Indians (a.k.a. “The Running People”) and Caucasians (a.k.a.
“The Lazy Assholes”).
1,000-10,000+ years
ago
Tarahumara
|
Caucasians
|
|
Means of traveling short distances
|
Running
|
Old horses
|
Means of traveling long distances
|
Running
|
Trusty steeds
|
Means of food acquisition
|
Running
|
Farming
|
Diet
|
Wild plants and game
|
Wheat, beans, goat
|
200-500 years ago
Tarahumara
|
Caucasians
|
|
Means of traveling short distances
|
Running
|
Horses
|
Means of traveling long distances
|
Running
|
Wagons, locomotives
|
Means of food acquisition
|
Running
|
Markets, taverns
|
Diet
|
Wild plants and game
|
Bread, cheese, pig
|
Present day
Tarahumara
|
Caucasians
|
|
Means of traveling short distances
|
Running
|
Segways, Vespas
|
Means of traveling long distances
|
Running
|
Airplanes, automobiles
|
Means of food acquisition
|
Running
|
Walmart, Golden Corral
|
Diet
|
Wild plants and game
|
Corn syrup, animal byproduct, Red Dye No. 40
|
Look, I’m no expert, but it doesn’t take a rocket
anthropologist to see that the evolutionary selection factors for the
Tarahumara Indians were significantly different from those that affected your
great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather from Canterbury. (By the
way, American Anthropologist, if you’re
interested in publishing this research, I’d be willing to entertain a proposal.
We’ll be in touch.)
No rubber footwear—or lack thereof—is going to make you any
less biomechanically inferior to The Running People.
So, despite Chris McDougall’s best attempt to make me a
foot-glove convert, I remain firmly committed to my belief that white people
need shoes. And dance lessons.