I’m not saying I’m Batman; if I was Batman it would be a foolish thing to admit to and if I wasn’t Batman it would be a foolish thing to claim to be. What is true, however, is that Batman is pretty cool and it would probably be pretty cool to be a cool dude like Batman. It bears mentioning, however, that I have never been seen in the same room as him so you can’t prove that I’m not Batman so long as you can’t prove he isn’t real. While I’m on the subject, if I was Batman I’d definitely be the Christian Bale Batman – not Lewis Wilson and those absurd granny panties of his, or Robert Lowrey or Adam West (both were too Spandex-ey, I restrict my Lycra-wearing to Cycling, not running about town like a lunatic vigilante), or Keaton (too mouth-puckery), or Val Kilmer (too contemplative), or George Clooney (I can’t get on board with the sort of vanity that forces a grown billionaire to include fake nipples in their suit of ballistic armor).
Is Batman a hero or a villain? Vigilantes are frowned upon in real life; they are threats to society because they live outside its rules and people who live outside the rules are not to be trusted, like cats. In real life, Batman would probably be hated by about half the public and loved by the other half, with very few individuals faffing about with moderate feelings on the subject. On which side you fall would probably have less to do with logic or reason that it does with how you feel about who the vigilante targeted. It might also have something to do with how comfortable you are with not knowing what morals are guiding an individual’s actions. In the case of Batman, we know he’s a damaged but well-intentioned man motivated by a home brew of revenge and the desire to protect society at large from the agony of his own experiences. In the Real Life Batman*, we’d have no clue about what motivated him and all we’d know is some costumed dude with fun toys was beating people up and the people he was beating up were generally associated with crime; the rest is up to the individual to fill in with their imagination, bias, and predisposition. The question of whether the vigilante is a hero or a villain has less to do with their actions but with the context in which we view those actions.**
I love Marco Pantani. Even today I regard him as a hero. I admire the rider he was at his peak, and I sympathise with the wounded animal he became after his fall. Finally, I regard his passing on Valentines Day to be a Shakespearean tragedy played out in real life: a scapegoat who died of a broken heart on a day founded on the notion of martyrdom.
I despise Lance Armstrong. Even before his downfall I regarded him as a villain not unlike the sort Batman might target. I view his reign as the sort of plot for world domination that any number of DC Comic supervillains may have undertaken, provided they were keen Cyclists. I regard his fall as the triumph of Good over Evil in the fateful sense as plays out in Beowulf more so than the moral sense.
In essence, both perpetrated the same offense, yet I hold them in two entirely different and discrete views, separated by a chasm of irrational logic and untraceable emotion. How is it possible that a rational mind can hold these two opposing views? I have asked this question of myself many times. I suppose it has much to do with the part of my brain which we usually pretend lives in our chest. I throw a rope-bridge across the chasm by stating that the doping isn’t what I hold against Armstrong, it’s his being a bully and all-round ginormous poopy-butt. But in reality, I can’t separate the doping from his behavior any more than I can separate the doping from Patanti’s epic crushing of fools.
Pantani and Armstrong aren’t the only ones, there are many many more. Coppi, hero; Bartali, villain. Merckx, hero; Maertens, villain. Ullrich, hero; Riis, villain. Bugno, hero; Berzin, villain. Even Tyler Hamilton claiming he ate his own twin in the womb rather than admit doping didn’t make him a villain but Ricardo Rico almost killing himself by trying a DIY blood transfusion definitely did despite the tragic desperation inherent in that particular incident. We interpret which are the heros and which are the villains by how we interpret the context around their actions. Context is a malleable thing; by adjusting the aperture to compensate for the shutter, we can alter the nature of the photograph.
I’m not a subtle man. I don’t generally deal in the currency of moderation; I like to love riders and I like to hate riders. I prefer riders who polarize because they give you something real to chew on even when its something you don’t like. It seems the modern era has less of these sorts of riders than past eras. In the wee hours of the night, when the ghosts of all my mistakes and tasks left undone come knocking, I distract myself by entertaining the question of whether I liked the racing better when riders were treating EPO like any other vitamin. I don’t, of course, but the heroes and villains seemed easier to tell apart; these days they’ve gotten all mixed up. Wiggins and Froome are both typical modern Tour winners: ultra-specialized one-dimensional characters with a complete and total focus on their objective. Their ability to control the event during their prospective years was impressive, yet the lack of depth of their public personalities and style of riding made it hard to love them and even harder to hate them; the most you can do with that sort of rider is admire them idly or hope someone more interesting falls out of the sky to beat them. Nibali has much more depth and would be easier to love (or hate) but his too-close association with Count Dracula makes it impossible to view his victory with the innocence I had during the 80’s, 90’s, and even early 2000’s; I can no longer watch with unquestioning eyes.
I don’t think heroes and villains can be manufactured, they have to be a product of their environment. In fairness, I can’t blame the riders when I know the UCI has been manipulating them for the last twenty years in the pursuit of their own villainy, which hasn’t left much room for anything else; like grasping a lump of slurry, the more they tightened their grip on the sport, the more it squeezed out through their fingers. (Princess Leia also had something to say on this matter.*)
The UCI is on the right track; Brian Cookson is showing positive signs. I think opening up the Hour to UCI-approved track ITT bikes is a sensible first step. The next step is to take away the basic obstacles to innovation such as the double-triangle frame and wild handlebar positions. I’m a traditionalist more than anyone else, but innovation is polarizing and polarizing gives everyone on both sides something to sink our talons into. And talons bring out the heroes and villains.
* I don’t want to confuse too many characters from too many fictional stories that I fell asleep during and might have mixed up. That being said, a good parallel for Batman in the sense that when we know the motives of the character is Billy’s Jack o’ Diamonds in Seven Psychopaths with whom we can sympathise; in real life, we’d just see some bloke shooting other blokes, which is frowned upon in most societies. The Empire in Star Wars is possibly the most perfect parallel of power gone wrong to that of the UCI that I can think of, apart from the many examples from actual history that haven’t been packaged up in tidy six-film epics.
** I have clumsily tried to crystallize in one paragraph a question that Chuck Klosterman spent the better part of an entire book examining. For a much more interesting (and funny) examination of the hero and the villain, read I Wear the Black Hat.
I know as well as any of you that I've been checked out lately, kind…
Peter Sagan has undergone quite the transformation over the years; starting as a brash and…
The Women's road race has to be my favorite one-day road race after Paris-Roubaix and…
Holy fuckballs. I've never been this late ever on a VSP. I mean, I've missed…
This week we are currently in is the most boring week of the year. After…
I have memories of my life before Cycling, but as the years wear slowly on…
View Comments
@Ccos
I'm actually torn with Horner - I don't believe for a second that he won the Vuelta clean and the fact that he's essentially the only well known American rider of his generation to not have any role in the Armstrong/Reasoned Decision case leaves me with more of a bad taste. That said, I like how affable and candid he is during interviews and how he finished that stage in the 2011 Tour after crashing and not really knowing how he even got to the finish line was gutsy (and stupid) as hell. There are times I really like the guy and times I can't stand him.
I grew up watching the Batman & Robin t.v. show and still dig it. So bad and weird that it was good.
Since I didn't really start road cycling until 2003 and didn't start following the peloton with any passion until around 2008, the 1990s seem like a period I can't honestly evaluate. Always happy to read how others feel, but it was before my time.
I can say that if it was a low point in the doping history, it was also a low point in aesthetics. Late 80s/early 90s, the steel bikes still looked great. 90s Al, Spinacis, do-rags. Eck. Then again...it gave us the Carerra Jersey Tuxedo kit...
Velovita - the affability and honesty are exactly why I like Greg VA. He was interview by LeMan and Stefano after a TdF stage last year and he was just a good, honest dude. Maybe I just tend to love any athlete who can actually speak and talk in a conversational manner and not just regurgitate cliches. He also has a family history of sporting and grew up playing soccer. Love that too. And, I think he's a great all-arounder who deserves a big win.
On the topic of dope, when did the Spinacis stop being dope? Why are we not riding them around anymore? I had a set, and rolled dirrty with them quite a bit. Pro tip: they suck for cornering. What do we have to do to make them have a comeback?
@VeloVita I'm with you on that. My opinions have vacillated with other riders too. I used to be completely annoyed by Jensie before developing an appreciation of his habit of attacking out of a break away with. 50 km to go.
Hi Frank, its been a long time. Lets just say 2014 has been a killer for me
Great article!
this is absolute word which is said so much better than anyone else would:
I love Marco Pantani. Even today I regard him as a hero. I admire the rider he was at his peak, and I sympathise with the wounded animal he became after his fall. Finally, I regard his passing on Valentines Day to be a Shakespearean tragedy played out in real life: a scapegoat who died of a broken heart on a day founded on the notion of martyrdom.
That is exactly the way I see il Pirata. He was the aggressor, yet fragile. He was passionate, yet vunerable. He was a personna of dualities and perhaps the least understood of all our fallen heroes, and if your of the persuasion that he was a cheat, then a misunderstood fallen villian.
And another reason, which i have long been on the record for, that I absolutely admire il Pirata is that he was unapologetic for WHO he was. He acknowledged he 'was a cyclist'...seemingly shrugging the shoulders, with Italian flare blowing off the media and the accusations that the empty syringes of insulin and HGH were meaningful. The implication was a fact, that everyone else generally was doing the same.
But Frank, you know I must take exception with one thing you mentioned. Coppi, hero; Bartali, villain. Does there really have to be a hero/villian relationship or can there be a mutually beneficial relationship in competition, as I see this being just that. Bartali for example, loved Coppi and the feeling was quite mutual as was their fierce spirited rivalry, but don't foget Bartali's heart bled at the passing of his good friend. Not to say, I personally cannot put Bartali in the light of a villian given he freed so many of the Jews that were in Italy and whose lives were literally saved by him and his efforts to hide them from the nazi/facists oppression. Bartali (the pious) in my mind quite literally rose above the human frey of the day, had a vision that foresaw the need to help, and on his cycling exploits did what he could to oppose Mussolini. Thats just my humblest opinion.
great work, glad to be back finally
Souleur - welcome back!
@Souleur
Welcome back and 1 on the Bartali sentiments. The word "hero" is greatly overused, but Bartali is/was a hero.
As for the good/bad dynamic, what about Saronni and Moser? Kelly and Vanderaerden? Boonen and Faboo? Not every rivalry can be distilled down to a good/bad characteristic. That being said, Freddy Maertens and Roger De Vlaeminck? Freddy is definitely the good one there.
@roomservicetaco
Oh, don't go confusing real life with sport! He was one of the few Cyclists who would actually fit the real definition of being a hero. I consider him a villain purely in the sense of his rivalry with Coppi and on whose side I fall within the context of sport and sport only.
Good point though, everyone should be aware of what Bartali did. (Coppi also served, btw.)
@wiscot
Oh goodie! Saronni and Moser? It's hard to argue with Moser if you've seen Sunday in Hell - someone who rides that beautifully on the stones has to be a hero. That's the problem with Boonen and Faboo as well; theirs is the only rivalry I can think of where I can find something to love about both of them, although if Fabs keeps complaining all the time I'm going to grow real tired of him real quick.
Freddie is obviously a massive legend but the whole world champs thing has me putting him in the dog house always.
@RobSandy
Wiggins has great fashion sense (apart from most of his hairstyles and that mopey The Who look on his face all the time) but I can't get on board with his riding style, unless he wins Roubaix next year in which case I'll likely do an about-face without any hesitation whatsoever.
Cav is an excellent example of a very polarizing rider. Love him, hate him. Hardly anyone is neutral on him, which is his most redeeming quality. Also, as he's matured, I've gotten to like him.
@Roel
I'm glad somebody clicked on that! That's got to be one of my all-time favorite jokes.