The Bicycle Book by Bella Bathurst
£8.99 isbn 978-0-00-730589-6
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bicycle-Book-Bella-Bathurst/dp/0007305893
I got this book for xmas - I have read first 2 chapters & seems well written. First chapter is on authors experience at Dave Yates frame building "school" and 2nd on history of the bike.
This cheap paperback may interest other people here - must be, as recommended by our friend Boris.
The Bicycle Book by Bella Bathurst
Re: The Bicycle Book by Bella Bathurst
Really enjoyed her book. Obviously a cyclist. She's a clever cookie and also wrote an excellent book on the Stevensons' Lighthouses.
Re: The Bicycle Book by Bella Bathurst
I was given this book (in hardback) for Xmas a couple of years ago. An average/OK read if you make it through the introduction and dismissive attitude toward folding & small wheeled bikes. All a bit silly considering the book's all encompassing title. My copy soon winged its merry way to a charity shop where it is most likely living out a productive second life propping up all those unread copies of 'Fifty Shades of........... ' and Jeremy Clarkson biogs.
My recommendation for good bicycle books are James McGurn's 'On Your Bicycle' and Richard Ballantine's - 'Richard's Bicycle Book' - both far superior reads, these writers having real passion and enthusiasm for the subject.
My recommendation for good bicycle books are James McGurn's 'On Your Bicycle' and Richard Ballantine's - 'Richard's Bicycle Book' - both far superior reads, these writers having real passion and enthusiasm for the subject.
-
Cyril Haearn
- Posts: 15213
- Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am
Re: The Bicycle Book by Bella Bathurst
Pneumant mentions: folding + small wheel bikes
At the German cycle museum in Bad Brückenau, folders from the 1960s are displayed.
The idea was: in a time when more and more people were getting cars, the cycle industry tried to react and adapt, encouraging people to take folding bikes in their cars and then go cycling in the country.
Unfortunately the folding bikes back then were so unpractical (heavy, difficult to fold and unfold) that they instead accelerated the decline of cycling
Is that right? Were the folders back then so bad? I remember a bit of fun with a Raleigh RSW, but I used my "racer" for real cycling
At the German cycle museum in Bad Brückenau, folders from the 1960s are displayed.
The idea was: in a time when more and more people were getting cars, the cycle industry tried to react and adapt, encouraging people to take folding bikes in their cars and then go cycling in the country.
Unfortunately the folding bikes back then were so unpractical (heavy, difficult to fold and unfold) that they instead accelerated the decline of cycling
Is that right? Were the folders back then so bad? I remember a bit of fun with a Raleigh RSW, but I used my "racer" for real cycling
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
Re: The Bicycle Book by Bella Bathurst
Not read your recommendations Pneumant. Will definately look them up. Think you're being a bit harsh on Bella though. I suppose calling it the Bicycle Book leaves you open to criticism. I still think it's well researched, written or me. entertaining. Money well spent
-
PaulCumbria
- Posts: 461
- Joined: 23 Mar 2012, 1:52pm
- Location: Kendal
Re: The Bicycle Book by Bella Bathurst
She also dismissed recumbents, which irritated me.
-
Chris Jeggo
- Posts: 663
- Joined: 3 Jul 2010, 9:44am
- Location: Surrey
Re: The Bicycle Book by Bella Bathurst
I bought this book in 2011, having read a good review. However, within a few pages I had added so many post-its with my comments that I started to write my own review.
The book starts with a five-page introduction. The first page is a catalogue of the downsides of the bicycle. But wait, wait for it; the very last clause of the introduction is, "I'm a cyclist because I reckon there is no lovelier form of transport". Surely it would be better to reverse the order. This might seem like nit-picking, but it is far from the only example of negative aspects being given more prominence than positive ones.
At the top of page two Bella Bathurst states that the bicycle "doesn't have a particularly distinguished industrial history". Most motor car manufacturers of the thirties (when there were very many of them) started life as bicycle manufacturers, and the early rapid development of the motor car owed a lot to bicycle technology - the cycle engineers had already solved many of the problems.
Two sentences later she says that the bicycle "requires a lot of silly clothing". The bicycle does not REQUIRE any particular clothing, silly or otherwise. Specialised clothing has been developed for particular forms of cycling because it works better than ordinary clothes. Indeed, later in her book she describes how cycling helped to end Victorian conventions in women's clothing that are now perceived as ridiculous.
Still in the Introduction, she writes that folding bikes, Moultons and recumbents "look ridiculous and can't corner". Has she ever ridden a Moulton? I have, and it cornered. Alex Moulton was a very distinguished engineer and his bikes work!
Chapter One is about frames and framebuilding. She mentions Reynolds 521 tubing. No such thing; she must mean 531. I don't think her phrase "something silly like a tandem" was meant to be derogatory, but tandemists could easily take umbrage.
An example of negative, woolly writing is, "a lump of cheap badly-adjusted chromoly". Chromoly is a frame material, and frames are not adjustable. Maybe some chromoly tubes are cheap, but there are also seamless, double-butted ones, and chrome-molybdenum alloy steels have similar mechanical properties to the manganese-molybdenum alloy steel that is the celebrated Reynolds 531. Her non-specific, disparaging remarks here and elsewhere about chromoly are not justified.
Here's another quotation from Chapter One. "Steel is regarded as a heavy, spongy, tolerant substance". Steel spongy? She's out of her depth.
There is plenty of good prose in this book, and she covers some topics that I have not come across in other books, but this all comes after she has wrecked her credibility before the end of Chapter One by pontificating on matters she clearly understands insufficiently. I enjoyed it so much less than I hoped to that it soon went to the charity bookshop instead of taking its place in my cycling library.
The book starts with a five-page introduction. The first page is a catalogue of the downsides of the bicycle. But wait, wait for it; the very last clause of the introduction is, "I'm a cyclist because I reckon there is no lovelier form of transport". Surely it would be better to reverse the order. This might seem like nit-picking, but it is far from the only example of negative aspects being given more prominence than positive ones.
At the top of page two Bella Bathurst states that the bicycle "doesn't have a particularly distinguished industrial history". Most motor car manufacturers of the thirties (when there were very many of them) started life as bicycle manufacturers, and the early rapid development of the motor car owed a lot to bicycle technology - the cycle engineers had already solved many of the problems.
Two sentences later she says that the bicycle "requires a lot of silly clothing". The bicycle does not REQUIRE any particular clothing, silly or otherwise. Specialised clothing has been developed for particular forms of cycling because it works better than ordinary clothes. Indeed, later in her book she describes how cycling helped to end Victorian conventions in women's clothing that are now perceived as ridiculous.
Still in the Introduction, she writes that folding bikes, Moultons and recumbents "look ridiculous and can't corner". Has she ever ridden a Moulton? I have, and it cornered. Alex Moulton was a very distinguished engineer and his bikes work!
Chapter One is about frames and framebuilding. She mentions Reynolds 521 tubing. No such thing; she must mean 531. I don't think her phrase "something silly like a tandem" was meant to be derogatory, but tandemists could easily take umbrage.
An example of negative, woolly writing is, "a lump of cheap badly-adjusted chromoly". Chromoly is a frame material, and frames are not adjustable. Maybe some chromoly tubes are cheap, but there are also seamless, double-butted ones, and chrome-molybdenum alloy steels have similar mechanical properties to the manganese-molybdenum alloy steel that is the celebrated Reynolds 531. Her non-specific, disparaging remarks here and elsewhere about chromoly are not justified.
Here's another quotation from Chapter One. "Steel is regarded as a heavy, spongy, tolerant substance". Steel spongy? She's out of her depth.
There is plenty of good prose in this book, and she covers some topics that I have not come across in other books, but this all comes after she has wrecked her credibility before the end of Chapter One by pontificating on matters she clearly understands insufficiently. I enjoyed it so much less than I hoped to that it soon went to the charity bookshop instead of taking its place in my cycling library.