I have been staying out of this discussion, well, because i really am not a contest person and have very little interest in the competition. Tom's posting however struck a chord. If strict parameters are set up for judging, I would be afraid that the impetus would be to bring bikes that one may just as well see in a catalog, and transportation restrictions (how many can fit in the car?) would limit the amount of those bikes that reflect the individual's perspective on build/modifications. These 'different bikes' are the ones that really fascinate me, and outside of those historical bikes that I have never seen before, the KOFs seem the most interesting because oftentimes there is a collaborative gesture between the builder and the rider beyond fit.
I think that historical documentation is important, I appreciate the research that far wiser people have done with both the mechanical and the application of these machines. I really don't care if there are prizes to be applied for those that can 'paint by numbers' a build.
But I hope that whatever is decided, it increases the diversity of the bicycles i can see and appreciate at Cirque...gabriel romeu just missing a rain on a beautiful ride in chesterfield new jersey usa
Tom Sanders wrote:
> Here it is 5:30 in the morning. I woke up thinking that I'd write Wayne
> about this very subject and when I turn on my computer, I see that he has
> just posted on the very issues I wanted to cover in a post to him. It seems
> more appropriate now to post to the list instead.
>
> I love the original and period perfect bikes I see at Cirque. I do feel
> that the focus has become excessively narrowed on them, however. Imagine a
> car show where all the entrees are just the way they rolled off the assembly
> line. There are such shows.they hold my interest for a little while and
> then I start thinking "Where are the Hot Rods? The Roadsters? The
> Customs?". It seems to myself and to some others that the emphasis has
> taken a turn away from any sort of individuality on the part of the folks
> restoring and creating bikes as hot rods or expressions of their own
> individuality. This is fine. It will work on a limited basis. We can make
> it a Concourse d' Elegance if we wish. Do we really wish to? I sure as
> heck do not.
>
> Where would be the room for bikes like that fantastic Hetchins with the 19th
> Century handlebars that won People's choice a few years ago? How about John
> Barron's breath taking Red Paramount with the stunning drillium additions of
> two years ago? Or even that ghastly but very interesting Ostrich Skin
> covered Colnago from this year? Do we really want to relegate bikes like
> these to some kind of second class status? Remember when we make our tent a
> lot smaller, a lot less bikes and folks fit beneath it.
>
> For me, every year the Cirque event becomes more and more about the people
> there than the bikes. The bikes are just wonderful, but the chance to hang
> out with friends I mostly only see once a year is even better. Lots of
> these friends have an individual idea of what they want their bikes to be.
> If they want absolutely original or even unrestored absolutely original that
> is fine with me.but there is variation in the bike owner's vision of their
> bikes and this variation is every bit as important as any other aspect of
> bike collecting, in my opinion. We need room for these varying visions of
> bicycle excellence and we need to do it without relegating a major (and to
> me most interesting) portion of folks bringing bikes to a second class
> status. The idea of folks declaring their bikes as one thing or another
> sounds good at first but the more I look at it, the more it smacks of a
> 1950s Loyalty Oath.
>
> I think we either need to judge the bikes as to how nice they are or to quit
> any but a People's Choice Award.
>
> Celebrate diversity.
>
> Tom Sanders
>
> Lansing, Mi USA
>
>
>
>
>
--
G L Romeu
ø http://studiofurniture.com
ø http://lessplusmore.com
ø http://journalphoto.org