Fahrradsozialismus

Or One Got Fat, a 1963 propaganda film on bicycle safety.

I’ve never been much of a fan of the horror genre apart from perhaps enjoying them as period pieces in terms of production design & nostalgia for nostalgia sake. I can honestly say, however, that it is by far one of the most disturbing films I have ever seen – and I am including Turkish Star Wars & the 1962 Live action version of Astroboy, despite the fact that I was entranced by its frighteningly mesmerising albeit macabre narration by Edward Everett Horton (not to mention a plethora of good bad puns). You are hereby forewarned.

The messages are of course all perfectly sound, most of which you would expect today from any cycling advocacy campaign or a seasoned cyclist. Its realisation, resides in an entire different dimension of believability.

What construed as friendship or even fundamental human emotions (of course they are monkeys, after all) to the makers of the film is beyond one’s imagination. Just like many a classic horror movie, the members of the gang meet their gruesome demise one-by-one (including being flattened by a steamroller & falling into an uncovered manhole, naturally accompanied by sound-effects of hilarity) through their negligence of safety issues, the rest ride on with steady resolve, seemingly unconcerned towards their destination. The only child arrives safely without harm by following road rules, sits down, and devours the lunch of his companions, hence the title. Upon discovery that this child is in fact human, one probably shouldn’t be surprised at the capability of such cold-heartedness, but I don’t think social commentaries were part of the original intention of the filmmakers.

It really recalls the casualness with which pro-modern fairy-tales portray scenes of unspeakable violence, cruelty & general flagitiousness such as in Hansel & Gretel, The Little Mermaid & Little Red Riding Hood, as allegorical as they maybe, and as it is arguably in this case. Regardless of contemporary sensibilities towards such issues, the inherent experiential difference between the media to me would make the latter far more horrifying, especially as a child.

In addition to what one must be forced to interpret as humour, though undeniably morbid, again we see fear being used to punctuate the message of the film. Exactly how successful it was in enforcing the explicit message is unknown, and I can’t help but wonder just exactly how many children were traumatised & terrified out of cycling forever by this psychedelic Dantean journey through cyclic purgatory.

Came across this BBC programme exploring some current issues in road use in Britain posted here. Regardless of the necessarily limited background information, perspective & purposefully sensationalistic choice of style & subject matter that is almost inevitable in the mainstream media, it is still an excellent documentary providing some wonderful insights, especially as valuable lessons & warnings for Australia in terms of what can happen when a car culture tries to evolve, though some imageries strangely reminiscent of the early days of cycling:

Mao said once that correctly identifying one’s enemies is of principal importance in the revolution. In this case there are no enemies but ourselves.

Ariel in Disney’s Little Mermaid, fascinated by the human artefacts, remarked that no being who can create so much beauty can be evil (or something along those lines). Without entrapping myself too deeply by trying to define good & evil, especially in the context of human activity (though arguably they only apply therein), but many aspects of what is considered to be “evil” are nothing but complex manifestations of natural selection, that of the strong triumphing over the weak, be it in warfare, politics, economics or personal interaction. It is often despairing to think that despite the glossy appearance of civilisation & progress, we are still inherently driven by the natural laws of survival, and being alive is nothing but a struggle for supremacy, be it over one’s peers or one’s surroundings, just like the rest of what we call life. After all, success is defined by the relative failures of others.

One crucial difference however, is that we are aware, or at least are able to decontextualise actions enough to assign some meaning & order to our seemingly inevitable path of struggle, and rationalise them by creating higher purposes & that little thing called posterity. Taoist view on morality suggests that the very inception of such moral values & social norms are nothing but evidence of triumph of the opposite. Indeed due to the limitation of human language and perhaps cognitive processes in general, ideas are inevitably contrastable.

Ultimately then, this is an issue of universal values, something I have battled with ever since that initial curiosity that many are confronted with concerning what is right or wrong.

Take the varying views presented in the video, I have no doubt each individual view presented is sincerely believed. Isn’t the father wanting maximum comfort, convenience & security a perfectly reasonable response to what is perceived to be a hostile environment, even though others might not? Don’t the actions of critical mass “anarchists” demonstrate a sincere desire to defend & exert their rightful respect & recognition as road users, even if it is also perfectly reasonable to view them as confrontational & disruptive by the everyday motorist? Ultimately people will be first and foremost selfish, that again is perhaps animalistic. Tolerance & consideration for others, at least in the way we understand them, would have to be something uniquely human, and are often forgotten when one’s immediate interest is perceived to be threatened. I believe what I believe because I believe it, yet this applies to everyone, and being individualistic creatures without a shared consciousness, the beliefs will necessarily be different, even if they are rendered into identical linguistic symbols.

As communal creatures, we must make judgement on others in order to interact, and inevitably they will be based on one’s own predilections, even if we consciously remind ourselves to consider others’ opinion, for those still will be our own – evident in the irony that is this very post, but dualism is an integral part of human experience.

Having excelled my previous efforts in having an irrelevant interposition, do I really have anything constructive to offer thematically related to cycling, apart from the usual convoluted syntactic travesties? Not really, since I am only too aware of my biases & unreasonable partialities often on purely emotional & aesthetic grounds, but that, too, is something human.

Perhaps it is empathy towards one’s own kind, but my sentiments have often been on the side of the weak & the loser, be it in history, literature or on the rare occasion, sporting events. It’s not just that old rooting for the underdog mentality, but a general distaste for power projection & imposition, at least on a conscious level – such things should be fictitious & facetious only. One can certainly regard such a mentality as weakness itself or even cowardice, and in the animalistic sense it indeed would be, and perhaps a trend evolutionarily undesirable, but I do believe there is something to be said about holding the welfare of the weak, or more precisely those perceived at a disadvantage to yourself, as being paramount, and disengage from the race to the top, even if just a little bit.

In essence, the message is very simple – be considerate to other road users, and in particular, to those road users who are at a disadvantage to you – even if they might not be reciprocal or in the right technically speaking. For example, I tend to ride onto the dirt next to the cycle path when people take their walk occupying both sides. I’ve also often been given way to at zebra crossings which strictly speaking should only be done for pedestrians. Regardless of actual motivation, be it courtesy or caution, it is simply nice to give & receive such consideration to others. Perhaps a principle of least imposition, if a wanky name is called for.

Granted I do commute in the relatively insulated & relaxed traffic environment that is Canberra. Indeed I often have trouble crossing roads in some parts of China where it would be impossible for pedestrians to cross without forcibly cutting cars off. I don’t know whether such ethos is the product of the environment or vice versa, but I suspect it’s a little of both. Like all such idealisations, it’s only workable in any real sense when everyone is willing to give it a go, but when it become natural, the road will be infinitely more pleasant to use. One could go further and say that such attitude should pervade other aspects of human activity, and indeed it’s certainly not novel in the least in the message. That however, would be an ecumenical matter.

Just as the fearless red rider of Velosentai lie awake at night pondering exactly what bike would be represent the symbol of honour and justice on the road, lo and behold, an epiphany was upon him:

Not quite as ostentatious as the undeniably Japanese art of dekochari, but nevertheless like many aspects of Japanese culture, the difference between sincerity & irony is never too clear - to me one of the chief attractions.

Via Bakfiets en meer.

Nearly 1.5 million bikes were sold last year in Australia, compared with just over a million cars. An heartening figure in itself, even though it does not state whether the figure includes children’s bikes or toy bikes, and the figures in the rise of commuter cyclists are stategically given in relative percentages instead of actual numbers. Still, 22% as a national increase average is still considerable.

More information here.

I rode an old clunker of a ladies’ bike for quite a while before building my current commuter, and I’m sure like many people, associate experiences one.. experiences in relation to doing particular things. Sentimentalities aside, I am rather fond of the step-through design in general, and still ride them for shorter commutes just for a bit of change or for fun.

Functionally, the step-through frame allows riders to mount more easily from the front of the bike. Though back in the days when it was introduced the more important aspect of such a design would arguably be that of etiquette & sense of decency. Much like the sidesaddle, these were designed so that ladies would not need spread their legs to mount, something deemed frightfully indecorous and improper for any respectable women to do, especially in public. Indeed it was noteworthy enough that Hardy uses this to introduce an distinguishing aspect of Bathsheba in Far from the Madding Crowd early on in the book, perhaps suggesting her spirit of independence.

Today, in a world where such manifestations of Victorian prejudice & puritanism are nothing but literary allusions or quaint nostalgia, social mores dictating what can and cannot be worn by the various genders (biological or otherwise) are scarce, though it is still more socially unacceptable for men to have the slightest sense of curiosity in anything remotely feminine for themselves, and often a source of ridicule, even if in jest. I could say that this is my personal pronouncement to declare war on the shackles of gender specificity, but in all truth I just think they are really neat. Interestingly enough, in traditionally more chauvinistic societies in Asia, China in particular, it is not uncommon to see men riding these types of bicycles.

I mentioned my particular fondness towards the design in regards to their inherent elegance here, but there are practical aspects which makes them more ideal as commuters than diamond frames for some.

They are excellent for those who are less flexible, and it allows you fix baskets or baby seats on the rear rack, something which hinders one’s ability greatly to mount on a diamond frame.

This particular frame I found lying abandoned on one of my bike routes, with a warped back wheel & rear derailleur, I waited a couple of days just to make sure it was truly abandoned, and nursed it back to health, just like a sick puppy, differing on some very minor issues of vitality & molecularity.

The paint job is rather pedestrian, in keeping with the standards on my other bikes, functional but rather crude – albeit only upon closer inspection. It has the special distinction of have a Tiagra crankset, which is higher on the marketing hierarchy than anything I have on my road bikes. It is the only bike I have that has a chain guard, indeed the only full size frame that even have mounts for a dedicated chain guard, though not a full chain case which I would prefer in terms of look.

There was no real reason for having drop bars on this bike, as I have no aspirations of going anything other than a saunter on it. I simply had a white saddle & bar tapes left over from another bike, and thought it went well with the red.

I have yet to test the seemingly purely decorative mudguards on these in the wet, but have very little faith in their abilities in preventing me from getting splashed. I am curious as to whether such mudguards are indeed designed to be petite simply because they might match better (not necessarily so imho) with a “female” bike.

The chief advantage that would result from the establishment of cycle socialism, is, undoubtedly, the fact that it would relieve us from the sordid necessity of having to acquire new shoes not because they no longer commensurate aesthetically with one’s buttonholes, but from the utter indecorum of physical deterioration, as any dedicated ambulist can recount with considerable abhorrence.

One simply cannot overstate the vulgarity that is the predilection towards the motor car as a means of conveying oneself from one triviality to the next, leaving in its wake irreversible alterations to one’s mind & the natural environment of Man. Rapidity, like all such excesses & bombastics, should only be enjoyed in moderation & with subtlety. After all, only those who are always in a hurry should have need for speed, by being as noisely and as expensively as possible in doing so. It is a great tragedy when thw world defines worth by what a man owns, what he ought to own, what is owed to him, and not by what is beautiful.

The bicycle, on the other hand, is perfectly charming both in the gracility of its physical form and in the gracefulness of its operation. A well-dressed Adonis enraptured by riding a well-tuned bicycle is the only link between Art and Nature. Ecce Homo, Ecce Birota!

Not since our arboreal days have Man been so effortless with locomotion using what was bestowed by God alone. There’s something intrinsically Greek about the epiphany where one achieve complete harmony with the divine axial gyrations caressing gently the ground upon which one traverses, the contours assuaged with nothing but perfectly spherical, lubricious metallic orbs, so very ideal, and idolised & worshipped by sages of old.

One should either be a work of art, or ride a work of art, that love unspeakable.

From today bikes will no longer be allowed on trains in Melbourne during peak-hours, directly affecting commuter cyclists who cycle part of the way to work in conjunction with trains. This is in stark contrast with ACT’s recently introduced free bus service for cyclists. The combination of trains & bikes imho creates one of the most efficient systems of mass transit, offering capacity, speed & coverage of a rail network, added with the flexibility of bicycles.

Granted I don’t know how many cyclists actually ride on trains with their bikes, but it was obviously enough for it to be regarded as a nuisance by the operator, in which case there is always the possibility of introducing a bike carriage during these peak-hour runs, even some preferential space allocated for bicycles in a shared carriage. It was indeed surprising to read that bicycles were always discouraged on trains, especially in an era where it is popular for governments to at least appear to be catering for “greener” alternatives to established practices in all fields.

Article here.

Though not entirely comparable, this charming promotional film by British Transport Films from 1955 demonstrates some wonderful possibilities, not to mention some dashing contemporary cycling attire.

May the revolutionary spin eternally.

Thanks for visiting & ride safe.

New years, and its proximal dates, are supposed to be a time for calm reflection over the passing of yet another artificial & arbitrary temporal demarcation, a time to unleash one’s reservations against the over-commerialised way in which people behave & either spoil yourself or people close to you – all in all, a time where the Dionysian should triumph over the Apollonian just a little bit.

That is until reality hits home.

Why is it that during times like Christmas horrific things are more acutely tragic I do not know, but such unimaginable excruciations for those involved makes it difficult to even contemplate the existence of divine providence regardless of religion.

It is however some consolation that the spirit of Christmas is alive & well in this festive Times article about the woes & lamentations endured by the columnist from the heinous acts of cyclists (allegedly) littering. Whilst I’m almost certain that Mr. Parris’ calls for the decapitation of the (alleged) offenders are nothing more than agitation stylistics ever so popular in media today, especially when there’s very little to talk about initially, it is hardly surprising that it came across as being inexcusably vitriolic, as clearly evident in many of the responses. It does make one wonder why such 2-minute hate sessions are still so prevalent even with post-Orwellian awareness, ranging from trivial issues like these to the demonisation of entire groups of people, and exactly what message the author had hoped to spread.

It might be easy to recognise & criticise conceit & bigotry in those with different views, but one can never fully anticipate reactions from others to one’s own, no matter how carefully one tries & how well-meaning it might be. There’s really no fast & hard rules, as the standards will necessarily be personal. Indeed too much hesitance can only lead to complete obfuscation, not to mention being utterly boring, as I am clearly demonstrating here.

Hereafter anything else I might want to add only increases the compunction for rebuttals in whatever succeeding it, and it’ll really get nowhere, which was where it started originally. If there were to be a point at all, it’d probably be the importance of empathy in getting your message through. You will never make everyone happy, and as interesting as agitprop might be, embracing tolerance & compassion can be very effective, too.