Author Topic: techne and episteme

Simon L3

  • Guest
techne and episteme
« on: January 17, 2006 »
I'm perfectly serious about this. If you have to think about the Way Forward, how do you construct an understanding of cycling as a cultural narrative? How do you think about the future of cycling? Where is your start point?

The Glue Man

  • Guest
Re: techne and episteme
« Reply #1 on: January 17, 2006 »
To throw a pebble in the oil, culturally inscribed contexts run deep in this demi paradise vis bicycle balancing. I'm of the canvas dangler persuasion.
Mismatched socks, stripey acrylic, toe strap, bottle dynamo, granny geared. It's an incomplete narrative admittedly promising misty dawns and moonlit toil over a Paul Nash landscape and full consummation of the idyll is rare. Mostly it's just sweat and sore knees. My beginning and end. Ride as reverie.

bardsandwarriors

  • Guest
Re: techne and episteme
« Reply #2 on: January 17, 2006 »
My start point would be 'purpose'. Why do people cycle, and why does it come out on top for some people, in some environments, compared with the alternatives. I see pure function in everything, even in beauty and poetry; and purpose is at its root.

But I think the answer depends firstly on your purpose for asking.

blackpud

  • Guest
Re: techne and episteme
« Reply #3 on: January 17, 2006 »
To throw a pebble in the oil, culturally inscribed contexts run deep in this demi paradise vis bicycle balancing. I'm of the canvas dangler persuasion.
Mismatched socks, stripey acrylic, toe strap, bottle dynamo, granny geared. It's an incomplete narrative admittedly promising misty dawns and moonlit toil over a Paul Nash landscape and full consummation of the idyll is rare. Mostly it's just sweat and sore knees. My beginning and end. Ride as reverie.

I didn't understand any of that but it was beautiful.

Not Responding

  • Guest
Re: techne and episteme
« Reply #4 on: January 17, 2006 »
Crumbs. Just think.

For me it's how I get to work. Are you saying I need a cultural narrative and paradigm?

Actually, that's not true at all. It may have been true once but, 9 years on, I have a garage full of bikes, I ride for fun at weekends and spend all my evenings reading about the damn things. Oh and I tithe 10% of my earnings to Wiggle.

Flying Dodo

  • Guest
Re: techne and episteme
« Reply #5 on: January 17, 2006 »
I think, therefore I cycle.

And also...

I cycle, therefore I think.

QED.

Simon L3

  • Guest
Re: techne and episteme
« Reply #6 on: January 17, 2006 »
Techne I use in sense of being knowledge that is ready to hand at any particular time (not as some ahistorical always present thing in the fashion of the dreaded Herr H)

Imagine this. You're revolting. Not in a niffy, Brooks saddle kind of way, but in a revolutiony kind of way. To be precise the Aurora is shelling the Winter Palace. Where is your leader, Mr. V.I. Ulyanov. At a barricade? Darning a red flag? Not a bit of it. He's reading Hegel. Tell the truth, Trotsky thought that was a bit....effete, but he (Trotsky) had a nice white horse, and Lenin, methinks, only a gentleman's upright with Sturmey Archer gears. But I digress.

My point is this. Supposing that you are charged with charting the Way Forward. How do you know what is forward? Especially if you don't know where you are and where you've come from. And more to the point, especially if you're not sure if your journey is neccessarily conducted in the company of others, or whether the others are just coincidental.

If the latter, then there isn't much to say. If the former then it might be possible to work out what binds and moves, what enlarges and what unfolds. Do we have a theory of cycling as a cultural endeavour, that is, nonetheless, a physical exercise? Why does one person ride down the Embankment, moved by the lights and the smell of the river, and another person, unmoved, hope only for the money to buy a car?

Let's accept that we share a perfectly straightforward ambition. Cycling should be for the many and not the few, and people should not be put in harms way by cycling. What amongst us, the cyclists, do we bring from our past (by which I mean the past of of Major Taylor, of our grandparents, of Fausto Coppi as well as our own experience) that we can build a future on?

I'm relying on you. I'm relying on you because a lot of people detest us, and because some of our number just drift to the front at red lights and park athwart three front wheels, and because I don't believe that we cyclists are so seperate from one another that we have to simply accept it.

So let's start with an agenda for thinking, for inquiry and for research - once again, I'm perfectly serious. I really am relying on you.

Roygbiv

  • Guest
Re: techne and episteme
« Reply #7 on: January 18, 2006 »
If you are serious I'd say a good starting point would be to stop talking pretentious bollocks and get to the point. If you do that then maybe I'll be able to contribute to the debate without worrying about making a tit of myself.

bardsandwarriors

  • Guest
Re: techne and episteme
« Reply #8 on: January 18, 2006 »
He means that there are forces in society acting for us and against us, and as these forces grow and shrink relative to each other, cycling means different things to different people. Its usefulness changes over time, and the perception (or social identity) changes aswell, each playing off the other. It's a tricky subject to be sure, trying to understand a chaotic system like this; and it isn't easy to express unless you can find the right language.

Roygbiv

  • Guest
Re: techne and episteme
« Reply #9 on: January 18, 2006 »
He means that there are forces in society acting for us and against us, and as these forces grow and shrink relative to each other, cycling means different things to different people. Its usefulness changes over time, and the perception (or social identity) changes aswell, each playing off the other.
Well that nicely sums up the situation if you feel you belong in the "us". So Simon, you'd like us to think about how we'd change this situation to make it more positive for "us" and potentially increasing the size of "us" at the same time? Or is it more complicated than that?

ed_o_brain

  • Guest
Re: techne and episteme
« Reply #10 on: January 18, 2006 »
Thanks Bard's.

If I want to begin to understand what Simon has said in his posts where do I start? I'm always interested in what Simon's got to say and it pains me not to understand it.

I think a lot of people, even cyclists some of them (and I mean the unenlightened Halfords MTB type but at least they are on the right track) don't understand cycling. They have a perception of bikes being nothing more than toys. The motor vehicle is king because it gives full independance. It allows an individual to go where they want, when they want in the shortest possible time. Why anyone would want to walk, use public transport or a bicycle is incomprehensible when the motor car will allow them to complete the same journey is a tenth of the time.

Of course this is not true. Decent cycles are not just toys. They will allow you to make a reasonable commute in a reasonable time with other benefits that off-set the disadvantages of using the 'perceived ideal', the motor car, for that same journey. Even if you convince a 'normal person' (and I'm talking about established norms in a cultural context, not inferring that cyclists are abnormal ;) ) that cycles are not toys, they will still feel that purposeful cycling is not accessible to them because of the equipment and level of fitness required.

Then there is the whole aspect that the 'roads are dangerous' but I think this is more likely an easy defence when faced with the challenge 'why not cycle'.

The way forward I believe, is making cycling attractive, perhaps by sexing it up a little but also by making the benefits clear and showing people just how accessible and practical it is.

I think the start point would be Halfords (where people almost universally go to buy a bike) revising their range to include more decent and affordable town bikes and hybrids instead of mountain bikes and the odd expensive looking and intimidating racer.

Not sure how you go on from there. The problem is that most people need to invest quite a bit of time and patience in order to get a reasonable return from their bicycle, N.B. acquiring the fitness required in order to make reasonable progress in order to realise an acceptable journey time. I don't think that many people of a decent enough level of basic fitness for this. And I think this is possibly the main obsticle. We are a nation growing more and more obiese (if the media and national studies are to be believed) and this obiesity means an inertia that is difficult to shift.

I took to cycling like a duck to water because I have a very good baseline level of fitness to start with and I already enjoyed exercise and the benefits it gave me.

Si Davies

  • Guest
Re: techne and episteme
« Reply #11 on: January 18, 2006 »
<thinks out loud...>

Problem is that we (socially) do know where we've come from.  History allows us to create the past that our society perscribes and thus an identity based upon a habitus heavily controlled and replicated by current social ritual and asperation.  

The popular paradign is still largely modernist and subscibes to both social and technological evolution as being natural.  The bicycle is a monument of the past, it has already been experienced and thus we must move on from it..it can do nothing but to return us to the past and backward movement is failure.

If this is the case, either society needs to change to become more post-modernist so that it can move on by moving back....unlikely (the hippies never did get back to the garden).

Or cycling needs to change to differentiate itself from cycling in the past.  Example: take a (our) normative view of an  individual in our society: drives everywhere, uses car as status symbol as it is not only his transport but a large part of his identity.  Would this person take up cycling because he thinks that a bike is superior to his car or would be take up cycling because he can further demonstrate identity through cycling?  Well, looking at the massive growth of MTBing in the '90s and the way that people are now drawn into road cycling because of the high status kit availible and the images of exotic travel, I'd say the latter.  Thus cycling re-invents itself and draws people in because it enables them to display an improved identity.  They do not take it up because their habitus recreates a desire for greeness/fitness/health but because it endenders in them a requirement for a display of social worth based upon technology acquired the demonstration of a specific life style.  

<summary> don't bother banging on about the health/greeness issues of cycling, it'll take ages to get anywhere.  Just sex it up and they'll come...

Roygbiv

  • Guest
Re: techne and episteme
« Reply #12 on: January 18, 2006 »
Just as Simon pointed out that cycling is a different experience for different cyclists (his Embankment comparison), I don't think cyclists should make assumptions about motorists. Many people (including myself) enjoy the act of driving - it's not just about getting somewhere quicker than any other mode of transport. The holier than thou attitude of some cyclists who describe drivers as "cagers" is not going to win many converts. I digress.

I don't think the way forward or the answer is to make cycling sexy, or to position it as a green alternative to the car. Certainly car ownership and being a cyclist shouldn't be promoted as being mutually exclusive. People just need to be reminded that cycling is fun (who didn't ride a bike as a kid?), cheap, practical and easy (in fitness terms).

But who exactly in the UK is promoting this kind of cycling? There is the government's tax-free scheme where your company buys your bike. It's a great idea but how effectively is it being publicised? And where is the pressure or tax break on companies to provide proper facilities to further encourage cycle commuting? The two should go hand in hand. I live in Peterborough which has probably the most cycle friendly landscape you can get but the amount of cyclists on the road is pitiful. Most people live less than 10 miles from where they work yet the majority use a car to get there. There are myriads of cycle paths but they meander all over the place making it hard for cyclists to get directly from one side of the city to the other. I personally live about 2.5 miles from work yet in the winter I drive to work. Why? Because I don't have anywhere to get changed apart from a toilet cubicle, nowhere I can store my stuff during the day and nowhere to dry it if its wet. The small cycle parking area is also full by 8am. Over 2000 people work on this site and there is provision for less than 100 bikes.

The local branch of the CTC has hardly any members. Their Sunday runs are currently attended by about 3 or 4 people including the leader. What are they doing to attract new members and promote cycling? Nothing. I know this because the guy who runs it works in my office and I was talking to him about it.

How come when you buy a new bike you aren't given a leaflet or "starter pack" (if relevant) promoting different forms of cycling in your area?

How many of the thousands of people who take part in organised charity rides never use their bikes regularly? At the start and particularly the end points of these rides how many organisations are there promoting cycling on a wider basis?

The shorter Audax rides have the potential to be hugely popular. In my opinion they are what most people want from a weekend ride - non competitive, well planned, cafe/pub stops, interesting routes, generally open and friendly, cross-section of particpants. But Audax is not promoted to the wider cycling public and it is certainly not a "user friendly" organisation (just look at their website). I also suspect that a certain percentage of their membership kind of like it that way.

Sorry this is not a considered, structured reply, more a flow of thoughts and ideas. And it's a bit ranty, sorry for that too.

ed_o_brain

  • Guest
Re: techne and episteme
« Reply #13 on: January 18, 2006 »
All good points JT.

I wasn't singling out motorists as 'us and them'. In my small experience the non-cyclists I talk to are amazed about the journey's I undertake, especially the hilly ones because the natural choice for them for such a journey would be a motor car.

When I explain it's not big deal the impression I get is that they are convinced it is. They don't realise that they too could just as easily do that same journey everyday coping with the hills just by getting on their bike and riding.

Roygbiv

  • Guest
Re: techne and episteme
« Reply #14 on: January 18, 2006 »
All good points JT.

I wasn't singling out motorists as 'us and them'. In my small experience the non-cyclists I talk to are amazed about the journey's I undertake, especially the hilly ones because the natural choice for them for such a journey would be a motor car.

When I explain it's not big deal the impression I get is that they are convinced it is. They don't realise that they too could just as easily do that same journey everyday coping with the hills just by getting on their bike and riding.

I wasn't responding specifically to you Ed about the "us and them" but it's quite common behaviour among those who see cycling as some sort of poitical statement. A quick glance at URC will confirm this...

I get similar comments as you about my cycle rides even from people who are reasonably fit. Just the other day I mentioned to this lad that I'd done 27 miles on Sunday and he winced and repeated "27 miles!!??!!". This same lad rode the London to Cambridge a couple of years ago in 3.5 hours!

bardsandwarriors

  • Guest
Re: techne and episteme
« Reply #15 on: January 18, 2006 »
The trick with social narratives is to not get bogged down in anecdotes; because it's about much broader issues than that. Your generalisations have to be accurate, ie. they have to accurately describe reality at the anecdotal level. But at the level of the 'discourse' (look it up) which you are creating, it's wise to stick mainly to the higher and more abstract forms of understanding, and find your patterns in those instead.

I knew a guy once with a master's degree in sociology (speaking of being anecdotal!), and it was a big learning experience trying to follow what he said when he discussed such matters, and (even more) trying to picture exactly what he meant by it.

He used words like 'discourse', and went on about significance, signs and symbols. Symbolic meanings are everywhere, eg. everything that a given motorist thinks about "all cyclists" is symbolic - a cultural meme, propagated from one person to another in bars, homes and offices, through a word or a look here and there; or through little stories told and retold; and through the media, movies, adverts and 'news', etc. Those things then feed back into the media from the people, creating a 'discourse' which constantly reinvents itself and changes how people perceive things. (Some people naturally see those things and think in those terms.)

That's the kind of thing you are describing at this level (of 'social narrative'), but in generalised terms. There isn't really any place for rants; only for fitting the pieces together and understanding how memes and concepts are generated and perpetuated.

(Or something like that!!!)

So the question is, how could we construct such a narrative, which makes sense and explains how cyclists integrate into society, what their function is, and what 'cycling' means to different people, without relying on endless anecdotes. I was wondering last night about this, and I thought perhaps - we could start by making up a list of the forces at work - ? Or by categorising the types of opinion that are typically held about cyclists.... Or by listing and describing each type of discourse at work.... etc. Simon wants to know where cycling is heading, or how we can change its course in society, especially in how it is seen by other people - so that we can attract more people into it.

So what people think about the distances covered is relevant - that is one part of how outsiders see cycling. But there is a lot more to it aswell.