Dear Ken,
I am sorry if my response was a bit brief - with a baby in the hospital, my time is very limited. I meant to say "Nice story about the Caminargent. Thank you for sharing your wealth of knowledge on this list."
I had wanted to welcome you back to the list, too, thus my reply to your post. I am always happy if somebody shares my interest in French lightweights.
Asking for sources: I always want to read more about these things, so I had hoped you could steer me in the right direction. Or, if you actually did talk to the people who made the Caminargents, I wanted to congratulate you, and ask for a contribution to VBQ.
Specifically to your comments:
1. Rarity: Your post could be misread to say that only a handful of Caminargents had survived around the world. I know of at least a dozen, without having looked hard. However, I definetely agree that they are very rare indeed, especially in the U.S.
By no means did I want to disparage your collection, which must be without equal. Please note that I am not a collector - I just have a few bikes I like to ride.
2. Women's bikes being funny - a bike built for performance, and then a less-than-optimal frame design (this is a quote from Daniel Rebour). None of these female randonneurs appear to have ridden in skirts (the original reason for a women's frame.)
3. Vintage Bicycle Quarterly is intended to be a lasting source of information. In 10, 20, 50 years, the posts to this newsgroup will be lost. I hope a few issues of VBQ will remain for future generations, documenting the history of lightweight cycles while much of it still can be documented.
As such, VBQ is supposed to augment, not replace, the CR list. On this list, anybody (well, almost, you still have to please Dale!) can post whatever they want, which is great. On the other hand, VBQ tries to apply academic standards, meaning that articles are checked, they are referenced, and hopefully most of it will stand the test of time. If it doesn't, there is a corrections/additions column in every issue.
Furthermore, the photo quality that is achieved by print still is far superior to jpgs on the web.
I have been contributing to this "free" forum quite a bit, when appropriate. I am not making money on VBQ, such is the cost of printing and mailing.
Sincerely yours,
Jan Heine, Seattle
>Dear Jan (is it Jan or Yan?),
>
>I don't know where to start with you.You seem to have a hair across
>your derriere and I can certainly read between your envious lines.
>Where do you get off making comments like "I assume it is not
>original research"
>
>My work is my work, and references are certainly noted. I happen to
>correspond with Raymond Henry quite regularly, as I have for years.
>He is a friend and ICHC colleague. And BTW, if you have ever
>checked, the 2002 ICHC proceedings are not published.
>
>Your attempt at one-upsmanship is rather transparent. But let me
>address a couple of your rmarks.
>
>1) Caminargents are quite rare, even women's models, which were
>somewhat different. How many can you count, compared to the rare
>Masi's and Cinelli's, Rene Herses and Alex singers on the continent,
>of whicjh I have seen more than my share on Ebay alone in the past
>few years. Caminade was quite an enterprise, and I am fascinated by
>the comprehensiveness of his company (he even made spokes!!), and
>the products hat they produced.
>
>2) Why is it "funny" that women's cycles were offered by lightweight
>builders? I have seen womens frames from virtually every french
>builder, and several have come through my own door. Barra, Reyhand,
>Herse, Singer, you name them. What's your point? As a person who
>probably has the only collection of Barra cycles in this country,
>don't think that I have not collected information about them over
>the thirty years that i have built my collection.
>
>3) If you are so intent upon providing information, why not provide
>your "papers" here, for free, to the group. That way the whole world
>can discuss them.
>
>
>
>Lastly, if you don't have anything to say publicly to me, then keep
>it off-list.
>
>Ken Denny
>
>Boston
>
> Jan Heine <heine@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>Ken,
>
>Nice story on the Caminargent. Can you give us references where you
>read the story? I assume it's not original research.
>
>The Caminargents don't seem quite so rare that breaking one would
>wipe out the brand. Especially women's bikes seem to have survived. I
>don't want to infer that women don't ride as hard - but perhaps more
>women who don't enjoy riding are given bikes by male companions in
>the hopes they'll join the sport? Funny that most of these "high
>tech" makers also offered women's frames.
>
>Regarding Barra - Raymond Henry presented a paper on this builder at
>the last (2002) Cycling History Conference. I believe the proceedings
>have been published by Vanderplas, so the Barra piece should be in
>there.
>
>Also, the next issue of Vintage Bicycle Quarterly (out in a couple of
>weeks) will have a reprint (and translation) of an article from 1936,
>featuring a 7.96 kg (17.5 lbs) 1936 steel Barra cyclotouring bike.
>The weight does not only include fenders, lights and rack, but even
>the pump! The article spells out the weight of each component...
>
>Finally, the history of the French lightweight fanaticism will be
>discussed in detail (together with the history of the technical
>trials which brought all this about) in issue 4 of VBQ. You'll see
>details like headsets with exposed bearings, pedals with exposed
>spindles and more.
>
>Sorry for the late reply - sick child kept me busy.
>
>Jan Heine, Seattle
>
>For information on Vintage Bicycle Quarterly, check out
>http://www.mindspring.com/~heine/bikesite/bikesite/index.html
>_______________________________________________
>
>
>
>Do you Yahoo!?
><http://rd.yahoo.com/finance/mailtagline/*http://taxes.yahoo.com/>Yahoo!
>Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more