Fahrradsozialismus

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.

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.

So goes the somewhat unkind definition for cyclists who don’t wear helmets, using shock to convey the message, as is done in this German public awareness poster though far more sympathetically:

Australia is one of the few countries with mandatory helmet laws, so what self-respecting (regardless of what little there might be to respect) bike blog can do without at least some form of inane dialectics on the issue. I’m not going argue too much about the enforcement of law itself or the effectiveness of wearing a helmet, since there’s already much discussion covering many aspects. It is one of those topics that tend to generate voluminous amount of rather zealous repartee from all participants (cf. PC vs. Mac, CD vs. Vinyl), and so consciously avoiding the usual convolutions, I will simply say:

I don’t like wearing helmets.

Though of course as with all such generalised statements the clarification one must give in order to elucidate what it actually means would easily devour any genuine intention of trying to make a simple point, but verbosity will at least give a semblance of genuine content.

This being the blogosphere, the formula is often to introduce the subject with a personal anecdote enforcing one’s argument, as it is often more difficult to refute someone, at least openly in polite society, when people relate their own experience – though perhaps there’s less reservation in the virtual world. However lucid narratives are things I can’t even delude myself into being able to write, and it will suffice to say that I have had my share (fair or otherwise) of intimate congresses with geographical features – at least once post-bacchanally. As a result these have left some rather strong impressions on me to this day. Only once was I wearing a helmet, and upon that single occasion, the helmet most certainly did save me from something much more severe than a torn bag, a shattered helmet & nasty grazes.

But I still don’t like wearing helmets.

There’s one crucial difference between that single occasion & other times – I was riding my road bike, and I always wear helmet when I ride my road bike for fun or exercise, as I know that I’m far more likely to get hurt. To me this is the fundamental aspect of road safety for cyclists, i.e. the riding style, or perhaps more precisely, the riding mentality – something I referred to in that drivel about cycling attire, but is of more importance here.

Road bikes are optimisations upon what is already a very optimal design, and you can really appreciate the beauty of its streamlined simplicity when using it, in addition to the rush you’d get from the mental focus & sheer physical exertion. I don’t think there’s much dispute concerning the increased (arguably exponential) risk in going faster, indeed risk taking is a major part of what makes things fun & enjoyable. With such increased risks however, it is only rational to have higher levels of protection against accidents.

Cycling as a sport, that is to say road racing, BMX, mountain biking etc, the inherent risk is far higher than riding your clunker down to the shops for milk. Just like F1 or rally racing is far more dangerous than driving your kids to school. I tend to regard these are two very distinct activities, with the only similarity being the vehicle.

When I’m on my commuters, I adopt a completely different mindset, though often the route might be exactly the same. The pleasure is derived from something entirely different; it is a self-powered transportation with unmatched degrees of freedom that allows you enjoy the surroundings when you are travelling. Indeed sometimes I even think to myself why are these other cyclists go so fast – even though I am probably one of them when I’m on a roadie. Such dualistic, even dichotomous mindsets are too often observed in human beings when perspectives change, often subconsciously. It is probably inherently human, but without some degree of self-righteousness there can be no individuality, one of the defining human qualities.

I ride different bikes differently, but there is nothing to stop you from doing so on a single bike. Admittedly it’d be tough to keep a leisurely pace if you are on full Record carbon razorblade, but that is perhaps a reason to think about getting a more dedicated commuter if you travel frequently by bike.

The risk of hurting myself on a bike when I’m commuting is probably as high as hurting myself whilst taking a shower or going for a walk or cooking a meal, which is not exactly low since I am rather clumsy. I don’t really have too strong a position against mandatory helmet laws, since one life saved should be justification enough. But such overly paternalistic prescription are not exactly consistent considering there are many other “risky” thing left unregulated by law, and it is discouraging at least to some potential commuter cyclists, as biased as I of course am. Perhaps it is selfish, but I tend to think that risk assessment in this case can perhaps be left up to the individual.

Incidentally, Mandatory helmet law is one of the main concerns raised in regard to the possible Vélib’-style bike rental system into Australia, as there would be immediate issues concerning hygiene, storage, tracking & fit.

I don’t know whether it’s unhealthy to feel empathy for certain things other people discard due to neglect or upgrade, but it’s certainly a state I find myself in frequent enough to be self-aware of such sentiments, especially when it comes to bikes, as irrational as it maybe.

The Gentleman I purchased this off got it second-hand in Canada back in the 80s, and having just retired this year, treated himself to a brand new Dahon, which admitted was very nice, though I fail to see how it could displace rather than supplement his existing bike, or perhaps such anthropomorphic attachments to inanimate objects only a few.

Thanks to Google, it is almost certain that the Bike is a Crescent Mini circa 1965 made by Velocipedaktiebolaget Lindblad, though it is unknown whether the date is for that particular bike or the date range for this particular model.

The original paint was in rather appalling condition, so I repainted the entire frame, again rather amateurishly, especially since I failed to detach one side of the bottom bracket, thus unable to remove the single piece crankset. I also replaced the handlebars & saddles to my liking. There’s of course the standard mudguard & rear rack, though the original chainguard was no longer present when I got it.

I’m generally not too fond of smaller wheel bikes simply because of they handle no way near as well as full-size bikes, as well as requiring a higher cadence for the same speed. However that’s not what they are designed for, apart from portability, I think many of them are simply rather cute, including of mine - and yes, I am a Tintin fan ever since I was wee lad in China, and have geekishly named all my bikes after the books (good thing there were many colours to choose from!). Despite the blatant racial & cultural stereotyping especially in the earlier ones (though these are of particular interest again but different reasons), they still contain some of the most likable characters in fiction, including one of the best dogs anyone can hope for. But I digress, as tradition demands.

There are a few noteworthy features that are not too common on modern bikes readily available in Australia today. The most curious for those with mechanical predilections (which I unfortunately lack the skill & know-how to appreciate fully) is perhaps the rear hub, it being the Sachs Torpedo Duomatic, two speed with integrated back pedal braking. The gear change is also achieved by back-pedalling, which takes a little getting used to. There’s some further information including a diagram on the hub here.

I am not sure exactly what gear inches it gives combined with the original chainring, but have found it a good combination for the terrains of Canberra, which can be quite sinuous in places. For reference, I use 39×17 & 53×17 most often on my 700c road bikes.

The down/top tube can be detached from the seat tube allowing easier storage & transport. Not strictly speaking a folder in the modern sense, since it’s actually in 2 parts, but it also means the mechanism is more simple & arguably more structurally stable, which is not really too much of an issue since the frame is steel & certainly feels it. Ironically this is almost as heavy as my main commuter even though it is far smaller.

A feature which will not be surprising in the least to most European or Asian cyclists, but fairly uncommon in Australia, is the built-in rear spoke lock. In places like China where such locks are standard on most commuter bikes, bikes are very rarely locked to bike racks, lampposts or the occasional tree, nor indeed would there space to do so given the numbers. Such locks are great for preventing people riding you bike away, though in a culture where such locks are unfamiliar to most, including the thief, one has to wonder how likely it is to return and find a mass of broken spokes.

It’s a great little bike for the shorter leisurely trips around the town, as I have it setup to a very up-right riding position. I also have a pair of panniers which can be fitted for extra luggage space.

Having mentioned the possibility of having a Sentai show (re-edited into the Power Rangers series in the West) about cyclists in jest a few posts ago, it occured to me that the stereotypical cyclist, in this country at any rate, have more in common with the your average sentai member than meets the eye, which is plenty in itself.

Or El socialismo puede llegar solo en la bicicleta in the original Spanish by José Antonio Viera Gallo. Came across this quote whilst search for random associations between political movements & the proliferation of bicycles. My knowledge of Spanish rarely extents itself beyond the culinary fields, and thus I have no idea whether the English rendition is a faithful one or not (If any Spanish speaking readers can help out, it’d be muchos bueno. Gracias!). The most obvious interpretation I get politically is that socialism should take place gradually & not through violent & reactionary social changes, evolution, not revolution - to use an over-used phrase.

Irrespective of what he meant, the quote is quite perfect for what the cycle-socialist cause stands for -as confused and confusing ideologically as it maybe, both literally & in its implied message.

There are increasing number of public demonstrations regarding the better recognition & general road rights for cyclists around the developing cycling cultures such as Critical Masses & more arguably more eye-catching World Naked Bike Ride. One must admire the level of energy & devotion the participants have in events such as these, and the level of exposure alone would indeed have some impact on the public perception of cyclists. However as fond of dynamic or even militant political imagery as I am, personally I tend to favour more subtlety in one’s words & actions in reality. And like all forms of political activism, there’s bound to be some hostile reactions to the act itself, regardless of how well-meaning & logically sound the arguments are. There is a great little discussion over at Zakkaliciousness’ site with some helpful suggestions & insights.

Look at Jesus for example, some of the most beautiful ideas to ever grace this earth, and look what happened to him?! Ok perhaps not entirely comparable, not to mention grossly irreligious, but the point is probably valid. so ardent activism aside, perhaps it also will help to take a rather more relaxed position in the promotion of cycling, a form of political passivism if you will. Instead of organised mass rides of power projection & tours of solidarity, try to influence those around you through your own actions through practical examples of using a bike for everyday purposes & not just something for the weekends. Sure the statement you are making won’t have the same “Shock & Awe” as riding an iridescent pink Penny Farthing through CBD in your birthday suit (though to me probably less confusing), but in the long run the permeation is more enduring.

Like what is said in the Tao Te Ching (or was it an episode of Futurama?)

The best sovereigns rule with insouciance. Once his deeds are accomplished, people will say, “This has always been the way it has been before .”