publication date: 2016
In this book, Hoffman studied what happens when bicycle advocates, and even bicycle riders, don’t examine the racial, political, and historical aspects of any given place, such as a city, a neighborhood, a trail, or a proposed bike lane. In her opinion, bicyclists – especially leaders in the bicycling community – damage historical minorities, cities, and bicycling itself when they take a race-neutral stance or attempt to create events and policies without looking at how those who aren’t upwardly-mobile white people would be affected.
To explore these issues, Hoffman presented three case studies. One looked at a twenty-four-hour bike event in a mixed-race neighborhood in Milwaukee. The second studied the fervor and hostility generated in Portland when a black neighborhood was experiencing gentrification, which was symbolized by the installation of a bike lane on a prominent street. The third and final case study analyzed Minneapolis, which has a recent history of deliberately and explicitly recruiting middle-class white people to the city by creating bike infrastructure.
I loved this book. It converged with so many of my interests: bicycling, urban planning, communities of color, and other things. It also generally dovetailed with my own particular view about how the world is and should be. However, I realize not everyone would love this book as much as I did. Perhaps many of the underlying concepts would be alien to some readers or even disagreeable. Also, some might find discussions of cycling or urban planning boring because those aren’t topics that interest them. With that caveat in place, I have a lot of great things to say about this book and I would recommend it to most anyone because it was a quick and informative read.
Hoffman presented an interesting question at the beginning of Bike Lanes: what could possibly be wrong with an educated white person riding a bicycle in the city? I thought she did a great job of showing that there isn’t necessarily anything inherently wrong with being an urban white cyclist, but instead showed that being an urban white cyclist isn’t representative of many people’s experiences on a bicycle. For example, data in one city showed that 4 out of 5 tickets given to people on bicycles were given to black people. This discussion set up the rest of the book by showing the inaccuracy of bicycling as a “race-neutral” form of transportation.
Although most of the book was easy to read and enlightening, sometimes the concepts presented were confusing. For example, I still don’t understand what this sentence meant:
[N]eighborhood [is] “The place where one manifests a social ‘commitment’ . . . the domain in which the space-time relationship is most favorable for a dweller who moves from place to place on foot, starting from his or her home . . . .”
I struggled with what rating to give this book because I enjoyed it so much but I could see others not liking it. However, if you ever do come across it, I highly recommend you pick it up.
4/6: worth reading