Beware Apple, Microsoft, The Atlantic, Google, PMLA and Others!

Why should these corporations/publications watch their step(s)? Because I am starting a company. And this company is associated with both publishing and technology…somewhat. Here’s a mock-up of my business card:

Photo 24



What is NANO? NANO stands for New American Notes Online. And the aim is to create a new type of journal of American criticism that is shorter, faster, and (most importantly) different. NANO will be the only academic journal (that I know of) that comes out monthy and has letters to the editor and has a twitter feed —which is currently up and running: The name NANO indicates small size and brief duration. What I like about the word nano is that it also connotes new technology that may change the shape of daily living. And NANO will, likewise, change the shape of American criticism. 

More later.



Prepping For Travel

Seven Notes from the Street Theorist:

1. Do not use the word “freak” or “speed freak” when blogging because you will get spammed out the waazoo by nefarious entities. See previous post for my use of these two terms that I should not have used (again!).

2. I finally finished a group ride in Iowa City! Yes, it was the B ride, but still, I was active, and I felt like I was an actual bike rider. Actual as opposed to theoretical.

3. I am now just about at my fitness peak …and so what do I do?  I go take a little vaca and waste it all. So, what’s the point? At least I will not be overtrained when I return.

4. Twitter is easier than blogging. Twitter is like Facebook on crank. Check me out: Or, I should say. Follow me.

5. According to my calender, Ferdi Kubler won the Tour in 1950. Who will win this year?

6. I picked up my tennis racket for the first time since I broke my wrist (on the bike, natch). Tennis is fun and easy. Much easier than riding a bike really fast.

7. No, I am not doing RAGBRAI this year. So I won’t be able to blog it sweetly.

peace. scraps.

Speed-Freak Scanlan Rides Again

I like what this Scanlan guy has to say, so read on and check’m out:







Preparing legs and liver for RAGBRAI with Tour de Brew biking and beer

BY ERIC ANDERSEN | JULY 09, 2009 7:21 AM

And perhaps tomorrow, when I recover, you all street freaks can read about how I got served/swerved during tonight’s group race smack-down. High winds from the east? Check! A big group with lots of highly categorized riders? Check! One punkass street theorist ready to ride on the rivet? Check!

More tomorrow.

For now I need a beer.

Scraps (out)

Finally, Some Theory!

The word on the street is that my blog is turning into a biking blog.

Time to mix it up. Time to put some “Street Theory” back into this Street Theorist’s m.o.


I recommend Appiah's book

I recommend Appiah's book



This story begins with trash. I love my little cul de sac in the hinterlands of Iowa City. But I often find lots of trash in the street. I never see anybody littering, so who does it?  I don’t sit on my stoop all day, so I can’t tell. Maybe kids are littering, or maybe the wind just blows it towards my house. One theory I had was that my neighbors’ kids were secretly littering. Yesterday I was pondering what to do about this trash problem, when I spied my neighbor walking on my portion of the sidewalk. Then I saw him bending down. Then I saw him pick up some litter and put it into a plastic bag. He went up and down both sides of the street. He stopped in my yard and looked at me. I waved. He waved. Then it dawned on me: he was glaring at me because he thought that my kids had been littering on his street.

Oh, a street theorist loves it when the tables are turned.

This brings me to a short excursion into ETHICS. 

From my computer’s dictionary we find this explanation of the differing ways of interpreting ethics as a moral code of behavior:

Schools of ethics in Western philosophy can be divided, very roughly, into three sorts. The first, drawing on the work of Aristotle, holds that the virtues (such as justice, charity, and generosity) are dispositions to act in ways that benefit both the person possessing them and that person’s society. The second, defended particularly by Kant, makes the concept of duty central to morality: humans are bound, from a knowledge of their duty as rational beings, to obey the categorical imperative to respect other rational beings. Thirdly, utilitarianism asserts that the guiding principle of conduct should be the greatest happiness or benefit of the greatest number.


Below are some ideas (mixed with my own) from a recent book on ethics titled Experiments in Ethics by Kwame Anthony Appiah, Harvard University Press, 2008.

1.  What we do depends upon how the world is–therefore we must understand how the world is–and so our everyday decisions can and must draw from many different spheres of knowledge. Based on this, I can reflect that I decided to get angry about the litter, but I did not decide to pick it up. What sphere did I draw from? The sphere that says blame the other dude, blame the government, blame big business, blame my parents, but above all else, do not blame myself. Wait! is this also called The American Spirit? Or, is that too sardonic?

2.  In making choices we must start with a vision, however, inchoate, of what it means for human life to go well. This is via Aristotle in case you were wondering. What this means is that we do not make choices without some prior knowledge. In rather stark terms: we do not make decisions without some theory guiding it. Leave it to a to a street theorist to write that.

3. Not just politics, but also arts and sports are engaged in illuminating the present by drawing on the past. We make the future worth hoping for through frames of reference. If I am a biker, my frame of reference might be safety versus fun. I might stop during a ride to remove a tree branch from the bike lane because of my own past experience with tree branches. I put myself into the world of the future by remembering my place on the ground when I once went cartwheeling over a tree branch. What this means is that ethics are based on my desire to put myself into the possible event of being affected by the tree branch. Past and present are “smushed” together. I can decide to not stop and remove the tree branch–but that would mean that I have to pretend that I am not a biker, and not affected by tree branches. Basically, for me to decide to not remove the tree branch I have to pretend that I am not human. [Oh please, Street Theorist! This last one is too much! Perhaps.]

4.  Our evaluations of the world around us are made through passions and emotions, not despite them. Feeling is thinking. When someone asks you to take your emotions out of the picture, they are asking you to think without thinking. Sure it may be best to not pull your hair out over every decision, but dispassionate logic is really thinking calmly, not thinking without any emotions. What this means is that you might be well served to bring your personality into the picture when making important decisions. When you hear someone say “it is not my problem that there is a tree branch in the bike lane,” you can respond in many ways. You can even decide to not respond. But by remaining silent, you have made a decision. And that decision, to be silent, is not an ethical choice. Why not? It does not pass the test. Not removing the branch may hurt you or others (Aristotle). It is not rational to your well being (Kant). And not removing the tree branch does not benefit the greatest number, just a small number, like maybe the clinic or bike shop that has to repair the damaged body/bike (Utilitarian).

Finally then, do you litter, pick up litter, or think about blaming somebody for the litter? Do you bunny-hop the tree branch, stop and pick up the tree branch, or write a blog entry about picking up a tree branch?

Aristotelians, Kantians, and Utilitarians all have points in their favor. But nobody has a lock on ethics. You must navigate through the litter and the tree branches.

Good luck.


NOW WITH VIDEO: Race Report: Iowa Criterium Championships in Cedar Rapids

What could be better than a bike race on a beautiful summer day in downtown Cedar Rapids, Iowa? That’s right: Nothing!

The course is a rectangle that crosses the Cedar River four times. How is that possible? Because the river splits around Mays Island, hence four bridges. The two bridges at the bottom of this pic were used.


Mays Island, Downtown Cedar Rapids, Iowa

Mays Island, Downtown Cedar Rapids, Iowa


Besides the slight bowing of the bridges, the course is a pancake. The factors will be, as usual, the wind and the corners. The wind is not very strong, but still, it will be a factor when you are going at your max. Great corners (surface wise) and from what I heard, good surfaces throughout. That did not prevent all crashes, but I only heard of two: one in the master’s race and one in the men’s cat. 4 race.




I arrived during the women’s cat. 1, 2, 3 race. The field was very small, only about 13. And the funny thing was that it paid out to 15 places. Everybody wins something! The pack held together for most of the race. Robin Williams (ICCC) tried to break away, but was reeled in with about 5 laps to go. Kim Eppen (also ICCC) was nearly always at the front. I thought she might have enough to pull away during the last lap, but the other racers rudely used her and came around her in the sprint. Sorry that I don’t have the results for this race.


[note: this is a blog, not the New York Times. What this means is that I am not just a little biased, I am ultra biased: I don’t know everybody’s name, I only know a few cyclists from the Iowa City area, and I am not tethered to correct spelling. Sorry, sorry, and sorry.]



I was able to interview Matt Hartman (Atlas) after the single speed smackdown. There were only 5 racers, but still, not walk in the park. Matt said that he was just taking a moderate pull at the front of this 10 lap race when he noticed that he had a gap. “It was not an attack really,” said Matt, “it was more of a roll-away.” Continuing to ponder, Matt said that he didn’t intend the move: “I blame the rest of the group.” He decided to continue as the race was about half over. Then, on the last lap, Brian Eppen (ICCC) caught and passed Matt in a surprisingly quick manner. Still, Matt got second. Will (Bikes 2 You) was 3rd; Nick Martin (Atlas) 4; and somebody riding a Fuji (sorry no name yet) was fifth. I might mention that Brian was second in the master’s race. I might also mention that in the master’s race, he selected his single speed as his quiver, as his “WEppen” of choice. One wonders if a geared bike would have netted the win, or perhaps, a lesser placing.


MEN’S 4:

38 riders made for a big and exciting race. After a couple of flyers came to naught, the wind picked up a bit, and that kept the bunch rather bunched up. The pace and the corners whittled the field down to about 25. The last few laps got interesting.


With three laps to go, a rider burst out of the fourth corner and got a few seconds gap and another rider also had a few seconds on the pack. With two laps to go, one of these two riders who had a small gap was still off the front (the second guy I think). This rider off the front, Tim Putnam, looked big, strong, and smooth—although his face was a rictus of pain. As much of the course was open and flat, spectators could see him maintaining his lead of about 5 seconds through the corners. With one lap to go, Putnam had about 4 seconds—what, maybe 50 yards. The crowd went wild.


The suicide attack so rarely works, but when it does, it makes careers, it makes stories, it launches a hundred other copy-cat attacks too. How many times have we watched the lone rider in the Tour de France licking his stem with 10km. to go hoping against logic, hoping against history, to survive to the finish line. We watched Putnam grimace through the finish, one long lonely lap (.6 miles) trying to hold off the hungry pack that could see him the entire time. My guess is that nobody wanted to try to reach Tim alone, and nobody was fresh enough to try for the win off the front.


Rounding the last corner of the last lap, Putnam still had a lead, but it looked as if the pack was right behind him. The optical illusion of trying to figure out exactly how much daylight was between Putnam and the pack was a pickle. But I figured his lead was 30 feet. When the riders approached the line, I saw Putnam look back. Was he completely gassed, or was he looking to see if he had time to raise him arms?


And…a legend is born! Putnam held them off by about 20 feet at the line. A brilliant, gutsy move. Who doesn’t want this kind of win? I was able to track down the winner to get some insight. Putnam said that he was not confident of his sprint ability and the swerviness of many tired riders made him nervous. “I’m decent at time trials, and I did a bunch of cross-country skiing this winter, so I am in better shape,” said Putnam, smiling from ear to ear. Sorry I don’t have any pics of this glorious win.


Tim Putnam (North Iowa Spin) 1, Mike Hunter 2, Norbert K. 3 (Atlas), Jay Gorsh (Atlas) 4. Did I get these names right?



About 33 riders took the line for this race. I was sorta hoping that the wind would continue to pick up because that would make for a very interesting race with echelons and tactics and blocking and all that noise. But the wind did not cooperate and died down.


My friend Brendan Kealey (ICCC) was amped for the race. Not everybody is able to rock the pink trainer with this much style.


BK on the PT

BK on the PT



After about 10 laps of only a few efforts to break up the sticky pack, I noticed one rider quickly established about 14 seconds—Derek Cassidy. Ouch, he looks smooth, I thought. This could be it. But then another rider took off to catch him, Jerome Rewerts. The catch is made and they work together. And they are gone. The race is sewn up tight.


These guys are big and strong. Two others get a gap after waffling for a bit. Ryan Jacobson (Atlas) and Brian Zinc finally break the elastic and solidify their lead over the pack. Ryan and Brian have 3rd and 4th locked. Then one other rider takes off in search of someone to take him in. But nothing doing. Poor Ryan French has to slog it out between Ryan and Brian and the pack, but he does hang on for a very hard fought 5th place.


Men's 3 Podium

Men's 3 Podium

My friend Brendan came in 10th, which is a good showing. He said that the pack was surging all the time so it was impossible to know which riders would get a gap and which ones would fail. So, of course, you have to stay near the front the entire race, and that costs you some “matches.”


What do I mean by matches? Well, each rider comes with a certain amount of matches that he or she can light during the race. These matches are metaphors for attacks or large efforts. For example, I usually pack about 3 matches on any given day. The guys who came in the top 5 of the men’s 3 race carry about 15 or so.



Talking  Smack in the Smack Shack:


The Bikes 2 You Smack-Talk Shack

The Bikes 2 You Smack-Talk Shack


“This is just a workout. Hey, if I win, it’s just a bonus.”

“I hope for a really hard race, ‘cuz that helps me do well.”

“It will be very unlikely for me not to win.”

“A good goal for today is to lap the field two times.”

“I like chicken.”


The potency of these claims and this brio is one of the reasons that I could never reach the top ranks in this sport. Simply too much hard-core, knuckle-busting, spine-snapping competition for me. Too much of that killer-instinct for me.


Little Known Facts:

•   Kenny Labbe was one of the announcers. He rode on the Postal team with Lance Armstrong for many years. Very nice guy and a great announcer—very informative.


•   Brian Eppen decided to stick with what he knows: he will ride his single speed in his third race of the day.


•   At least one 50 plus rider is in the field; at least two 40 plus riders are here as well.


•   21 riders line up. The race pays 20 deep.


The line up

The line up


From the gun there are several attacks. Lee Venticher (Bikes to You) gets a few seconds, but is absorbed. Clark Grebbe (Poweraid) gets a few and is absorbed. He is always near the front. Paul Denninger gets a few and is then is absorbed.


Some Key Playas in the Early Laps

Some Key Playas in the Early Laps



Clark goes again and is joined by one. Then next lap three more chase. Then these 5 are all together. This might be the break that sticks. The pack hesitates. And that is it! These five will contest for the win: Clark Grebbe, Brian Eppen, Sean Walker (Bikes 2 You), Jim Cochran (Atlas), Gerald Osterlof (All 9 Yards). Hope that I didn’t forget anybody.


With this break established, three riders go off the front in search of some glory: Dave Lippold, Brian Mortiz, and Paul Denninger. They will all stay away and hold their places (6-8). I can’t remember if Paul was 7 or 8 in the end.


The leading 5 lap the pack and since there are so many Bikes 2 You guys in the pack, I am sure that they will set things up for Sean Walker. It is hard to tell what is going on, because each lap shows new riders in the front.


Going into the last lap, the Bikes 2 You train is solid looking. But wait, it looks like Brian Eppen and Adam Price (ICCC) take off on the right and hit the first corner with some serious speed. I look on the back side of the course and it looks like Price is leading out Brian. But it must be too early to ramp it up, no? Everybody is single file now. One the backside, it looks like two Smurfs (ICCC) are followed by some Mellow Yellows (Bikes 2 You). Who is who? The Smurfs have maybe 12 feet between ‘em and another 12 between the Mellow Yellows.


They disappear behind corner 3. By corner 4 it looks as if they might be together. But wait. It looks like one Smurf and one Mellow Yellow are going at it as they near the line. Sean Walker and Brian Eppen. Does Eppen have a big enough gear? Will Walker come around him. Going to be close.


Eppen wins by a few feet! Too much. And on a single speed too! Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!


Pro, 1, 2 Iowa Criterium Championship Podium

Pro, 1, 2 Iowa Criterium Championship Podium



And here is a video of the last lap: 


My friend Lee was nice enough to let me interview him after the race. His knee-length socks are red-white-and-blue numbers that nicely accent his pale legs very well. I’ll give him the last words:

Me: “So how was it? Any insight into team tactics?”

Lee: “That sucked.”


And there you have it.

But wait. I can’t let Lee have the last word. First, I want to say that this was a great event. I hope they have the crit championships here next year. I hope that downtown Cedar Rapids continues to rebuild after the flood (not many people were around, and few businesses were open). And while it may have sucked to have to race your ass off for an hour, it was really a splendid afternoon if you watch.


Thanks to HBA Racing for hosting this, especially Vern and Shirley Rotert and Larry Howe—the chief promoter. Thanks to all the racers and their families for supporting the fastest, coolest, most exciting sport in the world. Kim West might have some choice info on these races as he was an announcer, and as he has a radio cycling show, I need to give him a shout-out. Hey. Am-1460 KXNO (


And thanks for reading.


Official result should be up soon at


That’s the word on the street—


Star Trek: Confusion Meets Fun



Star Trek Crew Comparison

Star Trek Crew Comparison



5 Questions For All You Street Theorists Out There:


1. I was quite proud that Iowa was part of the movie’s setting. But it seems that in 300 years the terrain will change quite a bit. In fact, a Grand Canyon-sized canyon will develop near Riverside, Iowa (no canyons or even small defiles, escarpments, or cliffs are currently on display in Riverside). So, can somebody explain the scene in which the clearly-underage Jim drives that red corvette, eludes a robot cop, and nearly plummets over the edge of a massive canyon wall? Where did this canyon come from? Did Old Mans Creek get really big (miles across), really deep (miles deep) then evaporate? You know what I think? I think that this is first and foremost a movie about the degradation of the environment due to unwise techno-agriculture policies. Do you hear that Washington? Shape up, or J.J. Abrams will mock you, shock you, and, finally, Spock you.


2. What happened to that slug that Capt. Pike ate? Did he give up the information? What happened to the slug? Is it still inside him? I mean, Jim busts in to save him and barely a second goes by and Pike is killing the bad guys. That slug keeps me up at night. At the end of the movie, when we see Pike in the wheel chair, is he hiding the slug under his blanket? And what happened to his legs anyway?


3.  How did Spock get to the cold planet? And how did he get to that cave? Okay, I get it, I mean Spock has the benefit of being from the future, right? But, seriously, if he does know that Jim will get jettisoned to this planet at that spot, at that exact moment, then why “allow” him to almost get killed by that polar bear and then almost get killed by that red creature and then almost get killed by the fall down that cliff. So, it seems that if  Spock did know all that, then he was not afraid of a wee bit of revenge. I’ll save you ol’ pal, but not before a little payback.


4. I know that it is no excuse that I saw the movie only once, but can someone explain the time travel situation to me?


5. What happened to young Jim’s mom? Did I miss that too? Or did she start a meth lab in outside of Riverside, Iowa, and then get busted, thus sending Jim into the tailspin of reckless behavior, skirt-chasing, and the continual desire to get his face punched in as many times as possible?


I think that in these 5 questions (more like 18, I know) we find both plot summary and evaluation: Lot’s of action, not much narrative sense.


But when I need to make sense, I will look elsewhere. In fact I look to a fine newspaper in Iowa City for news and analysis: The Iowa City Press-Citizen. Especially I will look to the sense-makers who regularly opine on deep matters, like this guy (me). Oh, and I am responding to this editorial by the way.


While I’m at it, I often look at the Des Moines Register for their guest opinionators. Why? Because they recently accepted one of my opinions. You can check it out HERE.


And don’t be shy about writing back with answers to my Start Trek questions. I know that I have a lot to learn about Trekology.