"Happy the showers that fall on so fair a wilderness, scarce a drop can fail to find a beautiful spot — on the tops of the peaks, on the shining glacier pavements, on the great smooth domes, on forests and gardens and brushy moraines, plashing, glinting, parrering, laving."

Tenaya Canyon, from the top of Half Dome

I just finished reading My First Summer in the Sierra by John Muir and there were so many fun passages in the book that reminded me of my trips to the Sierras! As you may or may not know, John Muir was a Scottish-American naturalist, author, environmental philosopher, glaciologist and early advocate for the preservation of wilderness in the United States (Wikipedia). He was born in 1838 and this book took place from June to September of 1869.

The book is in journal form and chronicles the trip that he took with a sheepherder, who had to move his 2,000 plus sheep to higher pastures once the grasses in the valleys were dried out. They move up in elevation from the Central Valley of California, which sits near sea level, towards the high point of Tuolumne meadows in what is now Yosemite (approximately 10,000 ft), arriving in August and then turning back down the hill in September before snow starts flying again.

If you like trees and plants, you will love this book. If you don't, you can skip over his description of the abies magnifica (silver tipped fir) and go right to parts such as this one:

"Early in the morning I tied my notebook and some bread to my belt, and strode away full of eager hope, feeling that I was going to have a glorious revel."

The John Muir Trail, between Lake Tenaya and Cathedral Lakes

I mean, who can say no to a glorious revel? He also talks a lot about the weather, but in a way that makes weather anything but a dull subject.

"Another one of those charming exhilarating days that make the blood dance and excite nerve currents that render one un-weariable and well-nigh immortal." 

“Warm, sunny day, thrilling plant and animals and rocks alike, making sap and blood flow fast, and making every particle of the crystal mountains throb and swirl and dance in glad accord like star-dust.”

Near Tuolumne Meadows -- all these boulders were left behind by the glacier.

Be still my beating heart. Doesn't he make a sunny day sound absolutely fabulous? Then he passes by Lake Tenaya and notes the existence of:

"a knob or knot of burnished granite, perhaps about a thousand feet high, apparently as flawless and strong in structure as a waveworn pebble, and probably owes its existence to the superior resistance it offered to the section of the overflowing ice-flood."

Lake Tenaya (and the knot of burnished granite, perhaps)

I think I found the knot! If not, I better go and look again soon! He gets to Tuolumne meadows, and remarks:

"No Sierra landscape that I have seen holds anything truly dead or dull, or any trace of what in manufactories is called rubbish or waste; everything is perfectly clean and pure and full of divine lessons."

Tuolumne Meadows (with Cathedral peak in the background)

I agree wholeheartedly. Every time I have gone to the Sierras, around every corner is a new wonderment, another photo to snap, or smell in the air, or a new bird sound. It really is quite fabulous and this book really hit home. There were a few interesting things such as when he describes one day that he went from the North Dome to the Valley floor, which must be about a 10 or 12 mile hike down a steep trail nowadays. But then, there was no trail, and he described bushwhacking down a ravine, which must have been difficult (plus I think there is about a 3,000 or 4,000 ft drop in elevation to boot)!

I also love how he just straps a loaf of bread to his belt, as quoted above, or lays down on pine boughs or even a rock one night, so that he could listen to the sound of a waterfall nearby. It's just so poetic and it seems like such a grand adventure. I wonder if it really was as lovely as he makes it sound. He does note that there are large mosquitoes, some about an inch from tip of the stinger to the end of the wings, which sounds like something I would not be as fond of!!

There are many, many more passages that I bookmarked, noted and saved, but I will end my barrage of quotes with this one, which really reminded me of why I like to hike and do trail runs, especially in the Sierras!

Cathedral Peak and one of the Cathedral lakes

"Towards sunset, enjoyed a fine run to camp, down the long south slopes, across ridge and ravines, gardens and avalance gaps, through the firs and chaparral, enjoying wild excitement and excess of strength, and so ends a day that will never end."

Have you ever been to the Sierra Nevadas? If so, where did you go? Did you love them as much as Mr. Muir and I do? 

June is a transitional month, one of warm days and long nights. It is a month where your 5 am run is barely even in the dark. It is a month of planning days and weekends and weeks in the future.

Running: Although this was not my highest mileage week, it was a monumental one, in which I finished a 100 mile race near Bryce Canyon in Utah! In the past several months, I was starting to get a bit worried that I wouldn't be able to do it. However, in the weeks before, and definitely once I started the race, I knew I was going to see that finish line by hook or by crook. I ended up the month with 196 miles, 100 of them due to the race, and I climbed about 30,000 feet.

Reading: Due to a bit of travel as well as an increase of audio book time, I ended up reading 8 books in June. Many of them were just so-so, but there were a few standouts, such as Small Great Things, which is about racial issues, and To the Bright Edge of the World, a story about Alaskan exploration.

The Bones of Paris ***
The Aviators Wife ***
Small Great Things ****
Is Everyone Hanging out Without Me? ***
To The Bright Edge of the World ****
American Sniper ***
Minding Frankie ***
Evicted ***

Travel: I feel like I was barely home in June, as I spent two weekends in Santa Cruz and one in Bryce Canyon. The Santa Cruz trips were full of visiting and walking and seaside views, while the Bryce trip was hot and sweaty and beautiful in an entirely different way. I will let a few photos do the talking for this.

Holy hot, batman! Bryce, UT (photo credit: E.V.)

Willis Creek, UT (photo credit: C.A.)

  

Fall Creek, Felton, CA

Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk

Etc.: What else is happening? Not much! The garden is growing, but the yard is not mowing itself unfortunately, so most of my spare time has been spent just barely keeping things from looking like a hillbilly lives at my house!

Purposeful cucumbers and volunteer tomatoes -- mid June

Plums! Mid June

Tomato Jungle and volunteer squash -- Mid June

Corn, I hope. Beginning of June

Radish! Get out the salt!

Tomato Ladder, beginning of June

What did you do in June? What was your favorite book? Have you done anything new or exciting lately?

There seems to be a popular liberal narrative emerging about the present state of British politics which is largely summed up by (1) the Tories have got us into a mess over the past couple of years and (2) they, especially Theresa May, should apologise for getting Britain into this mess.

Utter bilge.

There may be a number of things Mrs. May needs to apologise for - a poor campaign, an overly insular leadership style, the loss of a number of Conservative seats - but all these apologies need to be directed purely at the Tory party that she leads and its candidates.  Further, an acknowledgement that she has learned lessons from the election and will seek to adapt her premiership to suit those would be helpful and politically adept.  But an apology to the country?  What a fruitless, pointless, unnecessary exercise that would be.

I presume the apology in question that liberal commentators have in mind would be along the lines of saying sorry for calling an election.  Really?  In a democracy?  The election may have been called for opportunistic and rather venal reasons, but the idea that we should somehow ration the amount of democratic engagement at the polls that the people should participate in is ludicrous and reeks of political class elitism. Mrs. May's motives in calling the election may have been ever so ignoble, but in the end she remained at the mercy of the voters.  Hubris did indeed come to rest at her door as a result, and she may wish to ponder many lessons from this, but we should not be demanding apologies from a wounded leader for the decision delivered by the people in an election.

Neither should there be an apology for calling another election in a few months if one is needed.  We are a democracy.  It is the people's right and responsibility to hire and fire their political leaders, and if that has to be done on a more regular basis until the people become satisfied with their collective decision then so be it.

There is an extraordinary feeling afoot, and it is embedded in the post-election liberal narrative, that calling elections too often is a Bad Thing.   We may be a democracy, harbouring rights that have been fought and argued for over many decades and which are still denied to the majority of people in the world, but we really shouldn't ask people to listen to political debate and hobble along to a polling booth too often.  It is the ultimate elitist nonsense, and it caters to a terrible view which suggests that we should cravenly give in to the anti-politics brigade who believe that a national political discussion shouldn't be allowed to get in the way of everyday lives to often.

This is the same view that we hear expressed about the referendum held last year which led to the Brexit process.  Now as it happens I am no fan of referendums, but I can't deny that they are the ultimate expression of the popular will on a particular issue.  It is a virtue of democracies that the popular will for change doesn't need expression in a revolution because it has a ballot box to use. 

The sub-text of much of this criticism, of course, is that the vote didn't go as liberal commentators wanted.  Rather than blame the people, however, it has become easier - though a lot more cowardly - to lay the blame at the feet of the leaders who dared engage the people in such a momentous decision.

If there is a "mess" in British politics then the responsibility lies squarely with the voters.  They have had the chance, more than they have ever had before, to direct events.  They have chosen to do so in a messy and sometimes indeterminate way.  But that is democracy, and we get the one we deserve because we are intimately involved in it.  Don't like the leaders?  Then do more than just vote.  Do more than just write well-paid columns about how bad it all is. Take some responsibility and get involved.  Stand, argue, persuade.

As it happens, I don't think the result of Thursday's election was a bad one.  It has yielded a humbled government, more willing to moderate its previously inflexible approach on Brexit, more willing to operate on a collective basis, more willing to appreciate the aims and aspirations of the voters who chose to withdraw their support.  This is what democracy should do.  The voters also, by a smidgeon, determined that they wanted the same government to continue in office.  For all his and his allies' blow-harding, Jeremy Corbyn didn't win and has no chance of forming a government with the present parliamentary make-up.  He hasn't got the numbers.  Because the voters didn't give him the numbers.  And yes, the DUP do actually count as a legitimate party.  Enough people in a part of the UK voted for them to send ten of their representatives to parliament.  They get the same rights as every other representative and that is the right, under the full scrutiny of voters who will be asked to deliver another verdict again at some point, to support or deny the biggest party its political programme.  

This isn't a "mess".  It's democracy in action and I'm sorry so many liberal commentators aren't very happy with it.  It doesn't require an apology from the prime minister.  The only people you can demand an apology from are the British electorate, and they are simply exercising the right hard won by their ancestors to nudge the government whichever way they want.  Live with it.

If you thought Theresa May was tone-deaf and unresponsive during the actual election campaign, then that's nothing on her performance since.

Following her seriously reduced circumstances I initially thought it was right for her to continue in office.  The electoral arithmetic suggested it as the only viable option, at least until the parliamentary circumstances changed.  She could have chosen to take on board the disastrous result that her cavalier election calling produced and govern as a minority leader but with significant consultation with other parties on Brexit.  That her own Brexit stance - which has been irredeemably, if unilluminatingly of the "hard" variety - would need modifying seemed evident too.

Then came the day after.  The prime minister's speech outside Downing Street was one of the most misjudged exercises I have come across.  She made no reference at all to the lamentable election result.  She simply announced she would be forming a new government, and for good measure she replaced the old "strong and stable" with the word "certainty".  I began to wonder if somehow she had been kept isolated from the election results.  It was a performance of astonishing misjudgement and ineptitude.  Compare it with David Cameron's eloquent and moving "mea culpa" after the referendum.  So utterly disconnected was her speech that she had to follow it up with a hurriedly organised television interview in order to "apologise" to all of the Tory MPs who had lost their seats thanks to her calamitous campaign.

More than anything else, this speech captured exactly why Mrs. May must not be allowed to carry on as prime minister.  The speech bespoke an absolute determination to ignore any circumstances that don't suit her.  It shed light on Mrs. May's utter inflexibility.  Here was someone who was so myopic and incapable that she couldn't even acknowledge the earth-shaking circumstances that everyone else was talking about and which had brought her to this pass in the first place.  She couldn't move from her script.  She couldn't develop a quick response to her massively changed circumstances.  She couldn't find it within herself to express any sort of empathetic understanding to her disappointed supporters and allies.

And if she couldn't do this simple task, part of the basic toolbox of political leadership, then how on earth could we expect her to manage the infinitely more challenging unpredictable and difficult Brexit negotiations?

I thought originally that Theresa May should stay and provide some continuity in difficult times, even if those times were largely of her own creation.

Now it seems to me that if we are to have any chance of a successful start to our increasingly unwanted and unloved Brexit negotiations, then Theresa May has to be replaced immediately.  All those foolish Tories who think she will be able to open such negotiations with imagination and flexibility, who have you been listening to?  For Theresa May, alarmingly and bizarrely, "nothing has changed".  This is a woman who can row back on a policy and claim it is the same one.  That level of delusion has now been extended to some sort of weird understanding of the election that suggests it has said nothing of value to her.

The Tory Party may be in a bind because of the lack of top rate talent in its upper echelons, but at the moment almost anyone - obviously excluding Liam Fox - would be better than the delsuional, mad force currently in charge.  Instead of ringing their hands and moaning about her advisers, Tory MPs should step up to the moment and actually try and serve their country.  And they should do it by providing new and better leadership.  If they do, in time we might forgive them for the Mayist aberration.

1.  Don't take the electorate for granted.  Theresa May's party (she abdicated the Conservative name for the duration) did this twice.  It assumed everyone would ignore the opportunistic nature of the election, and that they would then happily respond to a patronising campaign of empty slogans.  Turns out they didn't.

2.  Every vote matters, even under First Past the Post.  Young voters complained about Brexit, but their complaints carried little weight given the fact that many didn't vote in that ill conceived referendum.  This time they voted, and the change has been palpable.

3.  Traditional campaigning still matters.  Theresa May's party thought they could win this with a big data machine and by programming, without variation, key phrases into the political dialogue.  They thought they could avoid real voters with impunity, whether in televised debates or in the streets.  Jeremy Corbyn suffered a media monstering, but built up support through a consistent round of old fashioned rallies.  Crowds matter, it seems, and he was able to appeal to a decent proportion of the electorate through these rallies.  We're a democracy, and he met people.  Somehow it seems to work.

4.  Manifestos should not be insulated efforts.  Whatever the fine aims of Theresa may's manifesto, it was drawn up quickly by a tight group of May loyalists who failed to road-test it within the wider party.  It then backfired.  Surprised?

5.  Leaders should be able to campaign.  As everyone is noting, this election was entirely the product of Theresa May's desire.  There was no reason at all to call it, and certainly not the one she gave.  In consequence, though, one might have expected her to show some campaigning vigour and ability.  Alas, when calculating her election gamble, she failed to factor in her own dislike of campaigning.

6.  When you have a venerable party with all its traditions and brand, use it.  Theresa May's team confined the party name to a footnote and insisted that all of her candidates do the same on their official campaign literature.  Prospective MPs once called Conservatives simply became people "standing with Theresa May".  Once the electorate decided they had their doubts about Theresa May, there wasn't anywhere else to turn.

7.  We are a parliamentary system, not a presidential one.  See 6 above and remember that for all the dominance of party leaders, constituency candidates do still stand on their own merits as well.

8.  The "vision thing" still matters.  When all was said and done, there wasn't much of a discernible vision behind the May campaign.  "Brexit means Brexit" was as empty a slogan as has ever been uttered on a campaign trail, coming as it did with absolutely no enhancing narrative or vision at all.  Compare that with Labour's ability to appeal to a range of people with a clear vision of what needed to be done for Britain.  Agree with it or not, it gave the impression they were thinking about what to offer.

9.  Personalities are important.  Theresa May would have obviously been a dominant figure even without the quasi-presidentialism of her campaign. just as Jeremy Corbyn was on the other side.  The problem for May is that she failed to project any warmth or spontaneity and appeared to actively avoid contact with ordinary voters.  In a modern democracy it isn't possible for a leader to survive without a decent skill at communications.  May utterly lacked that.  Contrast her with the cheerful and positive Ruth Davidson, leading something of a Tory revival in Scotland.

10.  Is politics being re-set?  There is a case for this.  The election has seen the return of two-party politics, the effective icing of another Scottish independence referendum, and the likelihood of a more pragmatic, Europe friendly Brexit.  Are we coming through a nightmare period, for all the veneer of chaos that exists today?

May, as you may know, is my favorite month! This year, as always, it did not disappoint.

Running: In May, I ran 220 miles. This is mostly due to two races, one 100k and one 50k. Other than that, I had my highest mileage week this year, which was 73 miles. I climbed approximately 52,000 vertical feet, although my Garmin has been a bit wonky, so that is probably plus or minus 10%. I biked no miles...again! Biking fail. However, I did do about 1 - 2 x per week gardening / yard work, and I am calling that cross training!

Reading: I ended up reading 7 books, although it should have been more, as I took a long flight in May. However, I did get some "reading" done via audio book while running two races that took about 20 hours between the two of them! Usually I do not listen to music on runs, but this time, I used the time wisely! A silver lining early in the month was that all my holds at the library had really long wait times so I got some of my owned books read (in bold)! My favorites this month were The Sun is Also a Star, Stiff and Talking as Fast as I Can.

The Red Queen by Phillipa Gregory (***)
Sleepwalking with Me by Mike Birbiglia (***)
The Sun is Also a Star by Nicola Yoon (****)
Lolita by Vladimir Nobokov (**)
The Night of the Gun by David Carr (***)
Stiff by Mary Roach (****)
Talking as Fast as I Can by Lauren Graham (****)

Travel: Whew! May was a whirlwind of travel. All four weekends were booked! I went to Sacramento, San Jose, hiked Mt. Diablo with the folks, flew to Minneapolis for Lisa's wedding, went to Livermore/Fremont for a race and went up to my parents house for Memorial Day. It was full of good times with good friends and loved ones!

Lisa's wedding

Marin Headlands run

Feather River Canyon

My first game of the season

What was your favorite thing about the month of May? What was your favorite book in May? Where do you normally get your books (library/own/borrow/buy)?

After the scares for the Conservatives of the past couple of weeks, the broad consensus is still that they will return to parliament as the biggest party in the Commons after the election - and by some margin.  Or perhaps, in Conservative campaign terminology, the emphasis should be on Theresa May returning to office as prime minister, since the party itself has had very much second billing in this campaign.

The problem with the way May and her people have decided to run the campaign is that they had no way out once it went bad.  And it did go very bad.  If you are going to relegate the actual party to a virtual afterthought, and insist that your candidates announce on their election addresses that they are "Standing with Theresa May", rather than "Standing as Conservatives", then you do need to be very sure that the product you are selling is up to the billing.  In this instance it wasn't.

While the Tories are clawing back some points in the polls, the latest Comres poll is interesting in that it graphically shows the damage the campaign has done to May's own standing.  The Conservative Party remains at 12 points ahead of Labour, but May's personal negative ratings have soared by 10 points.

Having started out with the "strong and stable" mantra, Mrs. May seems to have done everything in her power to disprove it.  Michael Crick's "weak and wobbly" accusation was seized upon by many.  A quick review of the campaign shows up the problem.  Mrs. May didn't vary from the lines she had been given from the start, causing negative comment from thinking observers and a damning belief that she was a robotic campaigner taking people for granted.  She was insulated from ordinary crowds, and when she did face them it went wrong, as in the Abingdon market square.  She avoided the televised debate and failed to provide a good or credible reason for so doing.  She put out a daring manifesto pledge which had been ill tested and then rowed back within a day once it caused upset, refusing to acknowledge that that was what she had done.  On the single issue which she claimed the election was about - Brexit - she has failed to give any information whatsoever.  No-one is any the wiser now than they were at the start of the campaign exactly what this Prime Minister's approach to Brexit, the single most important issue of the election by her own admission, is.

The Tories may still win a significant majority in the Commons, but they do so behind a seriously damaged leader, and it is almost entirely her own fault, and that of her notoriously tight team.  Many voters started the campaign with a broad belief that Theresa May was the best person to be negotiating our exit from Europe.  I doubt few hold that belief now.  The best that can be said is that she is likely to be better than Jeremy Corbyn,  although in Keir Starmer he has a putative negotiator who would wipe the floor with the likes of Liam Fox and Boris Johnson and easily hold his own with David Davis.

She didn't intend it to, but the campaign has exposed Mrs. May's shortcomings under a harsh and unforgiving light.  She will never wield the same authority after this campaign that she did before, whatever the majority.  The days when her Director of "Communications" Fiona Hill could send dismissive messages with impunity to senior ministers should be over.  If nothing else, there needs to be a sea change within Team May and at the top of government.

The two chiefs of staff need to be downgraded as soon as the new government starts.  A proper, civil service trained chief of staff needs to be appointed, and an effective Communications Director - this campaign has suffered appalling communications as well as much else.  As for the senior ministers, Philip Hammond - who has been hung out to dry by No 10 several times - should be kept on with his authority enhanced and his ability to make an independent contribution to the counsels of government kept intact.  Liam Fox, virtually invisible in the campaign and unable in any case to speak without putting his foot in his mouth, should be relieved of his duties and an able minister appointed in his place.  I would also replace Boris Johnson with a more low key and effective foreign secretary too; either move Amber Rudd (leaving space for the promotion of Damian Green, perhaps, to the Home Office) or possibly promote the well regarded Michael Fallon.  Liz Truss, incidentally, should definitely be moved away from Justice and a more rigorously independent minster put in her place - Dominic Raab perhaps, or even the return of Michael Gove who was well regarded there previously.

Sadly, that is a wish list.  Mrs. May has never been the most flexible of people and she may well not see the need to make any changes, for all the evidence of her terrible campaigning.  One thing we might consider though.  After an election such as this, will she really want to fight another in five years time?  More to the point, will the Conservative Party really want her to?