Riding a bike. GQ magazine style.

I've just sat down with the November issue of GQ magazine, which includes a quarterly style supplement full of gorgeous things for the man about town to lust after.  So you can imagine how pleased I was to see the following photos in amongst the pea coats and must-have Autumn shoes.

The pictures form part of a spread of clothes available at House of Fraser (must remember to ask if they've got any bike parking at their Oxford Street store), and the photo shoot took place in Berlin.  I think our stylishly dressed friend in the photographs is riding an old Mifa bike, who are a German manufacturer who nowadays seem to specialise in lumpy frames from the Far East.  I especially like the wing nut hub release on the front wheel - you don't see many of them in London, for obvious reasons.

It's easy to dismiss pictures like this as just another on trend fashion shoot, but my heart warms just a little when I see images of everyday and ordinary cyclists in the mainstream press.  Anything that gets the message out that you don't have to dress like Lance Armstrong to ride a bike is a good thing in my books.  (Of course you can if you want to, it's just there's a lot of people out there who don't yet realise you don't have to, so prevalent still is the sporting imagery within the marketing of bicycles)

Here at i b i k e l o n d o n we've written plenty about cycling's image and PR problem before, on chicken shops, curry and cycling and on the Top Shop girls who ride again.  Whilst you lot ponder over those old posts, I'm off to book me some cheap air fares to Germany...  I hear the cycling facilities there aren't half bad, either.

Share |

Are you ready to cycle through winter?

Winter is with us and the roads seem that much busier with traffic.  There are fewer cyclists in the mornings going to work, and the care free, car free, long hot days of summer cycle chic seem a long way off.  The winter coats are out, as is the sea of high-vis jackets which take to the streets of London when the days draw short.

With the exception of the days when there's a Tube strike on and Bob Crow does his best to give cycling rates a boost, is it just me or do the streets seem strangely devoid of cyclists now that it is colder?  Sure, there are still lots of commuting cyclists out and about, it just feels like there are fewer of us and that maybe some of our fair weather brothers have taken to other forms of transport instead.  To be honest, when it's hammering with rain I don't blame them.  I've never really understood the prevalent attitude amongst cyclists in the UK that you HAVE to cycle in all conditions, as if getting the bus when it's raining is somehow cheating.  Personally I can't stand riding in heavy rain (I don't mind light showers) and find the perceived danger levels - and heart rate - go up ten fold when it's pouring down, the streets are slick with water and every driver seems to be peering through a tiny patch of wiped down misty window.  Maybe the "do or die" attitude some of my riding friends have stems from the general marketing of cycling as a source of pain and hard work - the image of which is so prevalent in the UK and which I think leads directly to why people buy lots of cycling 'safety' gear and why some people give up riding in winter altogether.  They are led to believe that cycling is dangerous anyway, and the addition of cold dark journeys makes it a perceived risk too high to take.  I've touched on the public face of cycling, and cycling's PR problem in greater depth before, but it's when the winter months come round that the gap between what I'd like to see achieved on the roads in terms of everyday and ordinary cycling and the reality of the situation seems most apparent.

But you know what?  I don't mind riding in the cold, in fact I love cycling during the winter months.  I was out on two wheels when the snow was falling last January and was at my desk hours before my beleaguered colleagues who battled their way to work on our creaking transport system.  With a good set of lights, a decent warm jacket (none of this "clothing for cyclists" malarkey either, I got a great new coat on Oxford Street on Saturday which is smart, practical and essentially four jackets in one!), some rather fetching woolen gloves and a scarf to match, I find cycling in winter a more pleasurable experience than slogging through the sticky streets in high summer.

I've oiled my hub gears, cleaned my chain and pumped up my puncture-proof tyres.  Anyone can ride a bike and it needn't be a perfect summer's day outside to do so.  And being able to eat copious amounts of Christmas cake with immunity just from riding gently to work and back every day is of course a great boost (or as my rowing team always say "Winter miles mean summer smiles!")  I'm ready for the winter, who is with me?!

Share |

Did you know i b i ke l o n d o n now has a Facebook page? It's easier than ever before to keep up with the latest cycling news and views from your favourite bike blog. Just click the 'Like' button over here.

City cycle style? Can't it be like this everyday please?

Last Friday the City of London's historic Smithfield meat market played host to the first City Cycle Style event.  Bike manufacturers, cycle clothing designers and chic cyclists united to put on a new kind of cycle trade show, combining music, food, fashion and fun. 

There were glamorous girls kicking back in cargo bikes from Velorution, hot young guys on tricked out bikes looking dapper in spats.  The latest on offer from those fleuro-weavers Dashing Tweeds graced the catwalk as did some nice-but-a-bit-expensive panniers from Michaud.  A great range of town bikes suitable for city exploring were on view; Viva made a great impression, whilst Moulton showed off two of their very latest designs, with the stripped-down belt-driven TSR-2 especially popular with those taking test rides after the event.  All set against the iconic/ironic back drop of a couple of gleaming red London buses parked under the beautifully lit Smithfield market hall roof.

I've written before how cycling in the UK has a major PR problem surrounding the wider public's perception of people who choose to get about by two wheels.  The vast majority of people who don't choose to cycle just can't see themselves riding because they don't subscribe to the current dominant image of cyclists; that 'Lance Armstrong look'.  Perhaps events like last Friday's can go some way towards showing that you don't necessarily have to armour up in lycra, day-glow and helmets in order just to ride a bike to the shops and back.

Mikael Colville-Andersen, of Copenhagen Cycle Chic would probably be quite perplexed by there even being the need to hold such a show.  He is as equally dismissive of those who would try to set cycling's stall out as purely the reserve of sports riders as he is of people who seek to sell you 'urban cycling clothing'.  His thinking (from this blog post) is quite clear on the subject; "You have a closet filled with clothes, don't you? If you're walking about town, you'll wear them. You have clothes for hot weather and clothes for cold weather. Whatever clothes you wear as a pedestrian are suitable for riding a bicycle. You KNOW this. You were young once. You did it then....  ..If you want to ride a bicycle to work or the supermarket over short distances, you do not need 'gear'. Just open your closet."

David Hembrow, from A View from the Cycle Path, takes a different view.  Commenting on a previous post of mine about 'What's stopping women from cycling', he explained that he thinks 'cycle chic' (if you want to call normal, everyday and ordinary utilitarian cycling that) comes not from a desire by cyclists to be stylish but as a consequence of cyclists no longer being under stress.  "The hats and hi-vis come from the conditions. They're a symptom of cyclists under stress. Once cycling becomes subjectively safer, these things disappear. I don't think you can force it."  He writes eloquently on his blog what he thinks the steps are that the authorities ought to be taking to make cycling a less stressful and subjectively safe activity for all: it starts, of course, with providing top class decent cycling infrastructure everywhere, and then building on that.

Me?  I take a view somewhere in the middle.  There's no doubt that there is a sense that the bourgeois are early adopters of 'chic cycling' here in the UK.  But the idea that it somehow costs money and you have to buy another form of expensive gear to subscribe to everyday and ordinary cycling doesn't sit easily with me either. In the same breath there is no doubt that the wider public view of cycling as being a physical, sporty activity is unhelpful and events like Friday's can help to dispel that view.  All in all, Friday night's bikes and fashion show was a great showcase of the potential and opportunity that lies in cycling in the urban environment and shows that perhaps, one day, the streets of London could be filled with effortlessly cool cyclists just like Copenhagen.  Part of that will come from how people choose to present themselves as cyclists, much more will come from 'non-cyclists' taking up riding as a consequence of how our roads provide for those who do so.  Perhaps events like Friday's can be a useful stepping stone towards that path?

Share |

The myth of the red light jumping cyclist

I was chatting with a colleague about cycling recently, and observed an incredible change in her opinion about us when the subject of traffic lights came up.  Her eyes widened, she seemed exasperated.  I asked her what was wrong; “It’s terrible when cyclists get hurt you know, but they bring it on themselves... all cyclists in London are the same; you all jump the red lights!” she cried. I should point out that my colleague is a cyclist herself, albeit from out of town, and is otherwise completely rational... The sad thing is, she’s not the only one who thinks this – you’ve all seen what our national newspapers write about us. So where does this idea come from, this myth of the mass red light jumping cyclists, and just how dangerous is it?

Those of you who follow me on Twitter will know I sometimes make informal cycle counts at junctions on my way to work, usually at Bishopsgate, Holborn Circus or the junction with High Holborn at Long Acre. When I get caught on red at these lights I’m able to count all the cyclists passing through the junction or lining up alongside me to wait our turn on one revolution of the traffic lights. The record so far has been at the junction of Holborn and Long Acre, where I counted some 37 cyclists in one turn. Needless to say I couldn’t do this if I’d jumped the red light, and I know that particular junction is usually like a mini Critical Mass when the lights turn green; I once saw 17 cyclists patiently waiting their turn with me in the Advanced Stop Line. I can confidently say that many more cyclists wait at the lights than jump them.

As one of the most vulnerable road users we have the most to loose if we put ourselves in positions of danger; for this reason most people don’t jump red lights all of the time because, obviously, it is not safe to do so. However, using the same theory I know that many cyclists sometimes RLJ to remove themselves from a source of danger behind the white line. There are specific junctions on my morning commute that I know very well; one in particular has no ASL, leads to a narrow in the road, and also has a four-way red stop built into its traffic light sequence that allows pedestrians to cross. If I get to the stop line at this junction and find that an HGV pulls up directly behind me I will not hesitate to remove myself from the source of danger (the fact that the HGV driver can’t see me) by jumping the red light, just as I would keep myself from dangerous situations by not red light jumping at other junctions.

The Mayor of London’s recently published Cycle Safety Action Plan reveals some interesting statistics about cyclists and London’s roads. The report data (from 2007) shows that 79% of all cycling casualties occurred at or within 20 metres of a junction in London. It also shows that the second largest source of cycle casualties, after close proximity impacts with other vehicles, comes from other vehicles disobeying junction controls. That is to say 17% of all cyclists killed or seriously injured were hit or forced off the road by other vehicles jumping the lights or ignoring a give way line. By comparison, just 5% of cyclist’s KSI were caused by the cyclists doing the same.

To me this says two things clearly;

Firstly, our junctions should be better designed to accommodate safely the growing number of cyclists on London’s roads. More ASLs (which of course rely on Police enforcement) would be a good start, but we could do so much more; how about cyclist’s needs being programmed into the traffic lights sequence itself – they have ‘advanced green lights’ for cyclists in other countries, why not here in the UK? As my comments about counting cyclists show, there is clearly the demand for it.

Secondly, and perhaps more tellingly, the stats tell us loud and clear that other road users are just as likely to break the law as cyclists, and the consequences are much more deadly when motorised vehicles are involved. The roads need policing; road safety should be enforced to ensure people’s lives are protected. It seems short-sited indeed that our Mayor is reducing road Police and their budgets; a move that won’t benefit cyclists or pedestrians.

The Guardian newspaper’s Bike Blog recently ran two articles; one trying to show why anti-social cycling is a nuisance but not necessarily a danger, and another looking at why the City of London Police seem to target red light jumping cyclists. One thing that both of these articles failed to mention is the idea that in the great ‘pecking order’ of the road, cyclists should always give utmost consideration to pedestrians, as the most vulnerable road user, just as we’d expect motorised vehicles to look out for us.  I’ve heard cyclists argue that irresponsible riding isn’t a danger because ‘no one ever got killed by a bicycle’. Sadly this is not true, and if we follow the rule of the pecking order we should be giving way to pedestrians always. Furthermore, irresponsible riding can intimidate the elderly and the less agile; there is no reason to jump red lights in a manner which could lead to others feeling they have limited ability to use the roads safely. Over the years cyclists have been all but bullied off the roads; those of us who remain should not in turn be bullying pedestrians away. The data for London, if I had it to hand, would of course show that many more pedestrians are stuck down by cars every year than by bicycles. The always excellent Malcolm Wardlow BSc MBA in 'Assessing the actual risks faced by cyclists' backs me up:

"Typically only 3 to 7 third parties are killed in fatal bicycle crashes annually, as against 145 cyclist deaths. In fatal car crashes 1,600 third parties (600 passengers, 650 pedestrians, 75 cyclists, 250 motorcyclists) are killed in addition to 1,100 drivers.

...the belief that cycling is dangerous turns out to be a factoid; opinion based on long repetition, not evidence."

But the griping about red light jumping is louder and much more prevalent about cyclists than it is about motorists; despite the lesser risk. It seems to me that it boils down to another PR problem that cyclists face (in addition to being perceived as poor, or ‘green’ or “lycra-clad road warriors”), this idea that the way in which we cycle around junctions, red lights and pedestrians is somehow not only a great danger to ourselves but also a danger to the most vulnerable road user; the pedestrian.

Fixing this problem will only come from two solutions... More and more people cycling and it being perceived as an everyday and ordinary activity (and with this, more people understanding at first-hand what it is like to ride on our roads) would be a good start, and with this should come the re-design of our roads to accommodate more cyclist’s needs. But to really improve our reputation in London, and by default therefore attract more cyclists in the interim, we must mark one another’s behaviour ourselves. For sure, jump that red light if you feel it will improve your chances of surviving your commute to work, but don’t do it just for the sake of getting there faster (I hate the “lights break my cadence” argument, what are your legs made of, match sticks?!) and if you are going to do it, make sure you do it with absolute regard for pedestrians. When counting cyclists at one of the junctions a few days ago I saw another cyclist come storming up behind me, through the red light and straight into a gaggle of pedestrians crossing the road with total disregard for their safety, or how it would make them feel. I wasn’t sad to see one of those peds give him a mouthful. Do yourself – and cycling – a favour, and cross that line with care.

Cycling's PR problem, and its serious consequences

Cycling in the UK has a serious problem, and it’s one that’s not going to go away unless it is addressed head-on. Until then there can be no mass cycling in this country, no Mums and Grans on bicycles, no utopian dream of Amsterdam-like streets with the majority gliding down it on two wheels, not four. The problem?

Image.

The majority of people in the UK just can’t imagine themselves using a bicycle on an everyday basis. The humble bicycle has become so ‘alien’ and ‘other’ that it is now the reserve purely of special interest and leisure groups. Using a bike to "go for a ride" on a Sunday afternoon with the kids is seen as just fine here (indeed a significant majority of the UK population own bicycles and do use them for this purpose), but as a practical means of transport for everyday and ordinary use? For most this is almost unimaginable. Once upon a time there were over a BILLION cycle journeys in the UK every year – now the number has fallen so low that the cyclists we see on our roads are a tiny minority. As a modal share of all journeys, bicycles have dropped to just 1% of all traffic.

Minorities are often the victims of prejudice, and prejudice is often without grounds. But the power of prejudice is a strong thing when at work and should not be underestimated. Outside of the UK’s major urban centres, people who choose to cycle instead of drive a car are seen as quirky, or poor – labels that not many people want to associate themselves with.  Racing or long-distance cyclists – the very people who have kept the cycling flame alight in this country during the bike’s lowest ebb – are seen as diet-obsessed, lycra-clad racing machines; so utterly ‘other’ that more ordinary mortals just can’t see themselves doing the same thing. And who wants to use a mode of transport where you have to dress up in funny body-hugging clothes when you can climb into your car in comfort? And sub-cultural groups of cyclists don’t always do themselves any favours either. Have you ever heard racing cyclists talking about their bikes together? It’s all top tubes and bottom brackets and campagnola and derailleurs – great fun if you’re into that kind of thing but total gobbledegook to your Average Joe. Sadly, as these few cyclists are the majority of the minority remaining, the cycle industry markets it’s products to them (as I’ve discussed here before) meaning the public face of cycling is ever more strange which in turn will lead to fewer people taking up their bikes as an everyday means of transport. No one ever watched the Tour de France scratch its way to the top of the Alps in a peloton of glistening lycra and thought "That looks like a normal way of getting to work."

Special interest cycling (racing, mountain biking, BMXing etc) is great, and a source of fun, fitness and pride to many people, but these are ultimately sub-divisions of the same minority. If the cyclists of the UK really want to see mass cycling levels something serious needs to change. The City of Copenhagen is currently aiming to have 50% of all its commuters cycling to work within the next 5 years. London is aiming for just 5%. London’s cyclists – though growing in number every day – are not seen in a positive light by many of London’s other road users. Again, the same prejudice-based principals are holding the majority back from seeing themselves as potentially joining the minority. Outside of cycling communities, London’s riders are seen as a new danger on our roads; pavement riders, red light jumpers, a nuisance or even an outright danger. Worse still we are perceived to be anarchic, untaxed and using roads to which we have no financial entitlement, as a selection of recent comment’s on London’s Evening Standard newspaper testify:

“And what is a cyclist anyway? The old man on his bike, the gang of hoodies on theirs, the Lycra-clad aggressive health freak!!! Cyclists are like cancer cells in the blood stream of life. They pay no dues and suck of others.”
- Kev, London, UK

“Selfish pigs like you [cyclists] clearly show that you have no more respect for more vulnerable pedestrians than litter”
- Jack, Highgate

“...it’s time these self-righteous, sanctimonious law breakers were brought under control...”
- John Bull, London

“They are a menace on the pavements, and I for one refuse to move out the way for them, they are scum nothing more, nothing less.”
- P Staker, London

“Cyclists: dangerous, selfish, arrogant, self absorbed, stupid, ill mannered, nasty heinous creatures.”
- Anticyclist, London

“Shame on you and all the other sweaty, 2-wheeled scum!”
- Sonia Esquilant, Maidenhead, Berkshire, UK.

People follow examples set to them, and we have all been duped into thinking we need the special gear, the funny clothes, the flashy vests, to go about our cycling way – we’ve followed the example of those few cyclists who were left in the first place. And in doing so we are differentiating ourselves from everyday and ordinary people even further and making ourselves into a minority. Even though we all know that cycling has comparable safety rates to being a pedestrian, the hostile road environment doesn’t encourage us to hedge our bets – so we wear our high-vis jackets and fluro vests just in case. A Monday morning commuter stuck behind the wheel of his car in traffic doesn’t see a person peddling by but a strange lycra-clad backside, and quietly seethes inside. Meanwhile, the middle-aged woman at the bus stop seeing us flash past in all our high-viz glory assumes that because cyclists wear all this technical safety gear, cycling itself must be dangerous, and is therefore not something for her. Pedestrians hurrying to work step out from between cars and into the road assuming that their passage is safe because they don’t hear the approach of an engine. A cyclist swerves to avoid them and rushes by at close quarters. The pedestrian – who just isn’t used to looking for people on bikes in the road – curses and accuses us of being maniacs on the road. How many "I was nearly hit by a cyclist!" stories have you heard in comparison to "I stepped into the path of an oncoming cyclist without looking"? There just aren’t enough ordinary people on bikes out there to make it worth the raising of awareness worthwhile.  It becomes the very few us, and the very many them.

If we want mass cycling in this country (and I am making an assumption here that the likes of the CTC and the LCC actually do) it’s up to us to break down the prejudices we face and show ourselves to be everyday and ordinary people. Racing bikes and fancy team strips are just fine if you’re cycling mile after mile, but there’s just no need if you are making a short hop by bike. Remember that 60% of the UK’s car journeys are under 5 miles – there’s no reason why the majority of these trips couldn’t be done in ordinary clothes on an ordinary comfortable bicycle, if only that 60% could actually imagine themselves doing so, and thought that our roads were a safe enough environment to do so. The Dutch and the Danes manage it, why can’t we? As cyclists we all know that the majority of cyclists aren’t really Lance Armstrong wannabes, and nor do we cycle in a reckless or dangerous manner. But it’s the greater public’s perception that counts. The perception of what it means to be ‘a cyclist’, the perception of how safe the roads are, and the perception of the bicycle either as a means of getting from A to B in an ordinary way, or as a quirky, specialist, enthusiast’s machine. No one would dare call us a ‘menace’, ‘heinous’ or ‘scum’ if they thought that they were talking about people like themselves.

There needs to be a little more ‘cyclist pride’ – showing ourselves to be just like the sort of people who we want to consider taking up cycling, as well as explaining the benefits of our existence to other road users (it’s either us on bikes, or an extra 2420 kilometres of nose to bumper cars on London’s roads). Maybe this would bring about the level of cyclists needed on our roads for the vehicular environment to change in our favour. Until then this country will continue to turn out badly-designed token-effort ‘for minorities’ cycle lanes like this, and prejudice and stereotypes about cyclists in our press and public conscience like this.  Who here thinks they are a member of "the cult of cycling", as opposed to just, you know, getting around town?

Is this the worse cycle lane in London?

You'll often hear the argument from other cyclists that we should "be grateful for any cycling provision we get" or that cycle lanes that have been campaigned for have been "hard earnt", as if this means we should be silent in accepting them if they are second rate, or worse still dangerous.


Unfortunately, there are many cycle lanes here in central London that are so second rate as to actually pose a danger to cyclists.  Defensive cycling means cycling at least three feet out from the curb, away from the gutters full of dirt and debris, away from the doors of parked cars that might open at any moment, away from the potholes and drains and, most importantly, out in the lane where you can maintain a straight predictable course (instead of weaving back and forth between gaps in parked cars) and where you can be seen by other road users. 

If you kept within the boundaries of this cycle lane that I snapped on Lambeth Bridge near the Palace of Westminster you would be riding less than half a metre from the curb side - the useable part of the lane (ie the bit not covered in half an inch of raised slippery-when-wet paint or in the gutters) is so narrow you'd be so busy focussing on trying to balance and maintain a straight line within the confines of the lane that you probably wouldn't even notice the lorry ahead of you turning left without signalling....


Cycles lanes like this decrease the road space available to cyclists and, because drivers seem to perceive the painted boundaries of such lanes as some kind of 'magic barrier' are likely to get much closer when passing - this was demonstrated by a report by the Warrington Cycle Campaign  which showed the differences between overtaking space given by vehicles to cyclists on the road and cyclists in designated cycle lanes:

And when cyclists are wise enough to protect themselves by choosing not to use poorly designed cycling infrastructure, they are accused by motor users of not 'getting out of the way' and using the lanes provided (at great expense no doubt!).  This only increases the animosity sometimes evident between cyclists and other road users.

Regardless of the statistical truth, cycling is perceived as being a dangerous activity in central London.  Whilst more and more people are realising how easy, safe and convenient cycling really is, and the numbers of cyclists are growing year on year, we are a long way off from 'convincing the masses' to get astride their bikes.  If there is to be a shift-change towards achieving mass cycling rates (such as in the Netherlands or Denmark where certain urban areas are currently working towards achieving 50% of modal share of journeys by bicycle) there needs to be perceptibly safe and well-designed cycling infrastructure provided.  Our present Mayor is exceptional at marketing cycling in a positive and encouraging way that makes cycling out to be everyday and ordinary, which is great, but the marketing spin has to be backed up with well maintained, well designed and good quality infrastructure to boot.  If you don't think your Mum or Gran would feel safe using the facility provided (such as the Lambeth Bridge cycle lane) then it isn't good enough, and if you don't think your Mum and your Gran would feel safe cycling in the traffic there either then something else, a third way in terms of cycling facilities, needs to be found for London...

Post Script:

Of course not all cycling facilities in London are as bad as the one above, and some do provide safe passage or well constructed contra-flows against one way systems or across dangerous gyratorys.  But they need to be maintained and patrolled (like double yellow lines) to ensure that people don't abuse the facilities and park in them.  Over at MyBikeLane you can view and report incidents of vehicles encroaching on our space.  I am sure that most London cyclists will be more than familiar with having to cycle round one of their worst perpetrators:

 

A London cycle haven - Broadway Market

One of my favourite places in London is not just a fantastic place to pick up fabulous local produce and do a spot of people watching, Broadway Market, (map) is also a real cycle haven in the city. A friend of mine recently told me that he feels like he is in Europe every time he goes there, but to me this is somewhat missing the point - it's right here, in London, and is just as successful and real a cycling hub as anywhere on the continent.




On market day, Saturday, you'll be hard pressed to find a space to lock up your bike and you'll see bikes chained to railings two or three deep, or diagonally in order for as many to be accommodated as possible - busy bike racks are a sure sign of strong cycling culture in my opinion. The Regent's Canal - that green and blue strip of calm that ribbons through north west to north east London, gently burbles right past the market and the tow-path is often a clatter of "ting tings"' as cyclists announce their presence beneath narrow canal bridges. Above the canal bridge the fabulous Lock 7 bicycle cafe offers a unique space where you can sup good quality coffee sitting in the sun while the friendly, if not rather busy, staff fix your bike in their cafe workshop - surely the only cafe of it's kind in London? (Indeed, it even aroused the interest of Copenhagenize blogger Mikael Colville-Anderson on his visit to Hackney and he has some great pictures of the cafe)


On the market itself there is something for everyone - from fresh fruit to homemade cakes, and stalls where you can find a good quality butcher, fishmonger and more. The surrounding stores range from a proper old fashioned East End pie and mash shop (don't ask for a knife to eat with your fork, they'll just look at you funny, but it's yum all the same) to vinyl record stores and book shops - everything you need for lazy weekend shopping and quality retail indulgence (and it beats going to Westfield, that's for sure).


Bikes of all shapes and sizes, people of all shapes and sizes, all just doing their thing. And there is also some seriously quite competitive cycle chic going on here; but it makes a welcome change from the perceived 'lycra lout' image we usually associate with cycling here in London.  Hackney, the local borough for Broadway Market, has an 8% modal share of trips by bicycle (in comparison to Greater London's somewhat lacking 2%) and the highest cycling commuting rates in the country.  I like to think of the corner of Broadway Market and Lock 7 cafe as being a truly exemplary cycle haven here in London and hope that the effect on the cycle culture here will radiate outwards till everywhere in our great capital one day looks like this.

The public face of cycling?

I picked this photo up of an old Raleigh bike advert at Portobello markets a weekend or so ago - it was just festering there, slowly creasing and falling to pieces, in a huge mound of old photographs and pictures.  Something about it struck me, resonated with me, but I couldn't figure out exactly what it was.  So I picked up the photo for 10p and brought it home...

It was only when I got home, and I had a chance to take the picture out of my jacket pocket, that I was able to think about it more clearly.  

"How happy that sailor on the bike looks", I thought, 

"How handsome, and smartly turned out, and fit - especially compared with his garish fat friend in the background. How comfortable, and confident he seems.  I wish I looked like that when I ride my bike!"

Times have changed, it seems.  If you go to the Raleigh website today and click on the 'Men's bikes' tab, this is the image we are greeted with:

Now I know some of you will be thinking "Well, Mark isn't really comparing like with like - the gentleman in the old photo is a commuting cyclist whereas the gentleman on the mountain is, well, a mountain biker" I know this of course, and it's not apples with apples, but still I think it is very telling that this is the lead image that a cycle manufacturer chooses to promote their range of products.  I think it shows how far cycling and bikes have become somehow 'other' in our world, as oppose to everyday, and ordinary - something done by every day and ordinary people in their own clothes, and in comfort.  Now obviously if you want to ride a bike up a mountain, you need the right gear.  But surely this appeals to a limited market by comparison to everyday and ordinary people? (ie. everyone?) Shouldn't this market of 'everyone' be who Raleigh are aiming their bikes at, not just a small minority?

Transport for London employed M&C Saatchi to come up with their recent "Catch Up With The Bicycle" poster campaign, the aim of which was to encourage transport users to consider cycling.  I think they got it just about right.  Those who choose to wear cycle helmets do so, those who don't - don't.  The people are fresh and happy looking, upright and confident.  You can see their faces... This poster was shot in my neighbourhood in East London, on uber-cool Columbia Road (the shop with the red shutters is a fabulous sweet shop where I go should I feel the need to re-capture my childhood.  And rot my teeth.)

In the 1950s, before your parents and grandparents brought their first cars (only one per family mind you!) Britain had cycling rates comparable with the rest of Europe. Cycle traffic on public roads fell dramatically from 23 billion passenger kilometres in 1952 to only around 4 billion kilometres in the early 1970s, or so the Office of National Statistics tells me.  So long as cycling continues to be portrayed as something odd, alien, dangerous or 'weird' those figures aren't going to change any time soon.  I think the point I am trying to make here is that we need to think about the way that - as cyclists - we are portrayed in the mainstream.  Do your friends think of you as being a bit weird, in your funny clothes on your funny bike?  Or to them are you just another cyclist?  Which would you rather be?