Carlton Reid's latest book is now viewable online.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News
Bike to Work - online
(44 posts)-
Posted 14 years ago #
-
With more ads than content its fair to say.
Posted 14 years ago # -
Aye, but Carlton has to make his money somehow.
Posted 14 years ago # -
I tried, but didn't really make it past the first couple of pages. Not sure if it's the format, the layout, or what (the bits I read seemed perfectly OK).
I did however skim a good bit of it and was overjoyed to see the relative absence of lycra/armour/dustbin chic versus people cycling who actually look like something Joe Public might wish to aspire to.
If any of the ladies would offer a comment on the female-specific section, I'd be interested to hear it.
Posted 14 years ago # -
"If any of the ladies would offer a comment on the female-specific section, I'd be interested to hear it."
Errrr...I'm _not_ a lady, but I am a female cyclist. Perhaps for that reason, I don't 'get' the female section, which is subtitled (in the ToC) as being about 'cycle chic' and (in the main text), mostly seems to be pics. Nice pics, but just pics. Kind of pointless. No wonder it's been published online, presumably no 'real' publisher would be able to justify that sort of page extents.
Posted 14 years ago # -
"I did however skim a good bit of it and was overjoyed to see the relative absence of lycra/armour/dustbin chic versus people cycling who actually look like something Joe Public might wish to aspire to."
For the love of Pete... did this thread just get a flavour of anti hivis too?
Posted 14 years ago # -
Pretty much agree with SRD, the cycle chic section is just a gallery. I read something about riding slowly and generally chilling out a bit, because no women would ever want to go hell for leather on a bike.
The article about lock security was worth reading though. Those bolt cutters are scary.
And I liked some of the jersey designs, but "Share the damn road!" *ca-clik* "And if I don't...?" "Oh, er, as you were, I'll just lie down right here."
Actually, having been brainwashed by adverts, the one thing that struck me was how at first I was sure it was an American publication, but later on it seemed to be all about London.
Posted 14 years ago # -
You should have been with us sitting outside a Marchmont pub bike spotting yesterday, notable lack of Hi-Viz, just people in ordinary cloths using bicycles as transport. Some really cool bikes too... ;-)
Posted 14 years ago # -
But none of this explains why a section on women commuting is just about 'cycle chic' and not getting sweaty. As far as I can tell, the blokes on the forum worry far more about what they look like!
In a book on commuting, I would have expected something about HGVs. And much else that really is about sex/gender perceptions/experience?
Afraid this rather puts me off Mr Carlton Reid (who I had not previously encountered, except in mentions in previous posts).
Posted 14 years ago # -
"As far as I can tell, the blokes on the forum worry far more about what they look like!"
Sexist nonsense!!...
Posted 14 years ago # -
because no women would ever want to go hell for leather on a bike.
That's open to question...
Posted 14 years ago # -
Sexist nonsense!!...
Yes, that's shocking SRD, I'm surprised at you!
S'true though. ;-)
I read through the women's section the first time
and found it irritating and didn't really know why.
I've just looked through it again and although it
tries it is a bit patronising really. Whoops,
she forgot her mudguard! Head full of fluffy kittens
I shouldn't wonder. Etc.(post gone funny-must be the kittens)
Posted 14 years ago # -
Kittens? Where? 8->
Posted 14 years ago # -
Confirmed my suspicions...
Has *anybody* managed to write about cycling "for women" without either treating them as men (and so failing to address whatever the reason is for lower uptake) or being accused of patronisation?
It seems like such a difficult line to walk. In kit and going quickly = 'not everybody is all aggressive and in a rush'. Wearing normal clothes = "it's not a fashion parade". Sweaty = "don't want to sit at work smelling", not sweaty = "we can ride fast too you know" etc. etc.
There was a discussion recently on another forum which was mainly interesting because of the complete lack of consensus (about why women in London are 12x more likely to be killed by an HGV). Plenty of people attacking other people's theories though, on the grounds of sexism.
I guess in this particular case, it might be quite a bit extra to add (there are almost 250 pages in Cyclecraft), perhaps they ran out of advertisers ;-)
Posted 14 years ago # -
ps. the other day I bought new cycling shorts to replace my old ones, which had three years of daily grime but were quite serviceable, so must be on cosmetic grounds only. Scandal! ;-)
Posted 14 years ago # -
Must be our time of month.
Posted 14 years ago # -
"As far as I can tell, the blokes on the forum worry far more about what they look like!"
Oh - you mean like this -
Posted 14 years ago # -
I've got a secret ambition to burn past people in a suit, but so far the fact that I work in casual dress (and don't own any cheap black suits that I don't care about) has held me back.
With elbow pads and full-facer, of course...
Posted 14 years ago # -
"and don't own any cheap black suits that I don't care about"
Thought that's what charity shops were for...
Posted 14 years ago # -
"Has *anybody* managed to write about cycling "for women" without either treating them as men (and so failing to address whatever the reason is for lower uptake) or being accused of patronisation?"
Sam Fleming wrote about being a female bike geek in citycycling, not sure if that counts?
And while I'm here, Up Chic Creek might be of interest to those who think the whole Copenhagenize idea is taking things a little too far.
"Must be our time of month."
A Monday? *innocence*
Posted 14 years ago # -
"
"Must be our time of month."A Monday? *innocence*
"
Aye - you and Min innocents on the Innocent...
Posted 14 years ago # -
Answer me this: Who starts/replies to all the threads about t-shirts, being too trendy etc?
(of course, may just be a reflection of general demographics)
Posted 14 years ago # -
"of course, may just be a reflection of general demographics"
It's certainly a reflection of the fact that bicycles and discussion about them (and to a lesser extent use of computers) attract more male persons than female. This forum reflects that - unfortunately.
Connected is the whole business of 'cycle chic' discussed here and elsewhere (there's a new 4 minute movie about it). On one level it's about highlighting that 'ordinary people' cycle in normal/attractive clothing.
It's inevitable that photos have been (mostly) of women - reflecting the gender balance of camera ownership/use, the greater variety of styles that women are 'allowed' (culturally) to adopt, and the desire by 'cycle campaigners' to highlight that more women (than before) are cycling and by showing this to be 'normal' the intention is to encourage even more.
But...
Posted 14 years ago # -
"I've got a secret ambition to burn past people in a suit"
You mean like this?
http://www.copenhagenize.com/2010/05/bidding-with-bicycles.html
Posted 13 years ago # -
Maybe we need a new thread on "What is Cycle Chic?" as we are straying.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Maybe we need a new thread"
feel free
Posted 13 years ago # -
My point was not about the content of Cycle Chic, but that on this forum, it seems to be the men who are obsessed with it, but then bizarrely, it is the focus of this section which purports to be about women (in a book written by a man)!
For the record, I do think many men are very sensible and concerned about gender issues, and there is no monopoly on women writing about them. And it is very much to men's credit that they think the gender imbalance in cycling is a bad thing.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"it is very much to men's credit that they think"
aye
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Oh - you mean like this -
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/4636189017 "
I expect some spectacular summer plumage will come out when the winter/spring jackets are moulted off.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Steveo said: "With more ads than content its fair to say."
Not fair to say at all. 24 pages of ads in 98 page book. That's an ad/editorial ratio of 1:4, lower than most magazines (which you pay for, too).
SRD: yes, the photo spread of 'Women on wheels' is just pix. It's a photo spread. There's tons of text in the book to go with the pix.
Arellcat: I agree, it has an odd mid-Atlantic flavour. Sometimes I say 'sidewalk', sometimes 'pavement'. I think I use 'colour' throughout, mind. None of the US audience has commented on this, and there have been 250,000+ views and downloads of the book.
As well as being on clicky-flicky Issuu.com, the book has gone out via iTunes to podcasts, including the Fredcast of the US.
SRD: "In a book on commuting, I would have expected something about HGVs." It's touched upon but not laboured. This is a 98-page, short version of the full book. The bigger version has more content about HGVs, and lots of other topics.
This will also be free. The extra editorial will dilute the ads a bit more. Many apologies to those who don't think ads should be in there but that's the business model I have adopted. And, as you can see from the readership numbers, I've been successful.
While members of this, and other forums, tend to be died-in-the-wool enthusiast cyclists, I'm trying to reach out to the unconverted. Apart from Richard's Bicycle Book of the 1970s, name me another beginner's bicycle book that's had in excess of a qtr of a million 'buyers'.
As a freebie the Bike to Work Book will reach out to newbies.
Posted 13 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
