Semi-autobiography, semi-philosophical expository by Australian distance star Murray Rose. A triple gold-medalist at the 1956 Melbourne Games – then the youngest ever – Rose was less successful in Rome (winning a medal of each hue), triumphed 4 times at the 1962 Commonwealth Games, and was controversially excluded from 1964’s national trials. He established 15 world records in the 400, 800, and 1500 freestyle while being one of the first overseas recruits, to Peter Daland’s USC. Remaining in the US, Rose became a marketing professional, sometime actor, and NBC commentator. The book interestingly sketches his World War II expatriate parents but omits his first own marriage. Upon his 1994 return to Sydney, the Australian sports community lionized the vegetarian and devotee of Indian-turned-Californian guru Jiddu Krishnamurti. Most interesting are details of Aussie life and swimming in the 1950s. Most kids rarely wore shoes outside school; competitors had no goggles, often trained in bayside ‘pools’ or Manly reservoir, and did open turns against algae- and barnacle-covered walls. Rose liked competing in storms, from which he drew energy, and never had warmup pools; competitors false started to get a feel for water. In 1956, Aussies were the first cohort to shave. His best swims, he relates, were when absorbed in his own rhythm (p88); the first warning sign of fatigue is loss of mental focus; and the real challenge of sport is not competition but training the right way. One’s calling is not work but a craft: train not to get it right but to get it right when things go wrong, train for clarity and purpose not fitness. Hope not for victory but courage. His philosophy, which permeates the book along with contemporary pictures, is Eastern transcendentalist. Children are artificially ‘programmed’: the ‘opportunity to hold the window open to all the mysteries of life soon passes’ (p34). Is there not wisdom too in convention? By the book’s end, he has overdrawn: detachment (‘choiceless awareness’) is always good, everything must be examined; what of Burkean prejudice?