|
The Possibility of Mobility: Negative Reactions |
|||||||
|
Although by now one should have a sense that not everyone in the 1890s was pleased with the onset of the bicycling craze, it's nevertheless easy to underestimate the fury with which many greeted this new technology. Often, this debate centered around the fact that more and more people were now cycling at the expense of other activities, be it attending church or quaffing pints at the local pubs. Others simply grew resentful of the cycle's unwelcome intrusion into the public sphere--whether on crowded city streets or bucolic country roads. Indeed, for all those whom championed the rise of the bicycle, there were still a great many cursing its ubiquity.
As leisure time increasingly became defined in opposition to the hours of the workday in America, people frequently recognized the weekend as their "time off". This spelled bad news to those urging Americans to keep Sunday as a day of worship and rest, especially when the day could be spent out on the open road--on a bicycle! Indeed, one observer remarked that the bicycle was to be "the first big-scale assault of technology on institutionalized religion."(Dodge, p. 120). We would assume that the bicycle would be coexisting peacefully with religion were people using their bicycles to travel to church, but they were not. Church was often forgotten as cyclists took to the country for leisurely rides or worse still--races! For those who shook their heads in disapproval at these cyclists, it surely must have seemed that they had found a new supreme being to worship--one with pneumatic tires and handlebars. Perhaps the other large faction of people angered by the meteoric rise of the bicycle were those forced to share the road with these new contraptions. Particularly in the already over-crowded urban centers, the bicycle proved to be one more annoyance taking up space. It is little wonder than, that mischievous children and even ill-willed adults were known to impede the cyclist in any way possible, from simply pushing them over to throwing tacks in hopes of blowing out their tires and keeping them off their sidewalks and roads.(Smith, p.190). Although much of this scorn seems to have been directed at the reckless cyclist, he who would tear down the streets at unsafe speeds, much of it also finds roots in a public unwilling to adapt to a new technology. | |||||||