(Text: Vic­tor Morozov)

The absur­di­ty of wat­ching a cycling race by the road can only be gras­ped after the pas­sa­ge of the last rider. How long did it take? Twen­ty seconds, may­be. Then they are gone: a moving tapestry of flas­hy colours, lines, and dots dis­ap­pearing around the cor­ner. All you have left – for evi­dence – is per­haps a shaky video or a blur­ry pho­to and, in any case, the sen­sa­ti­on of being sand­wi­ched against the pro­tec­tion fence by tho­se whom you sud­den­ly feel a kin­ship with. The crowd quick­ly disper­ses, each one going his or her way. What was that all about? A ques­ti­on not to be asked on such occa­si­ons; for with road cycling, as with love, we tend to be dri­ven by pas­si­on, acting irra­tio­nal­ly in search of the mythi­cal pre­cise moment.

I once read a won­derful essay of “cine­phi­le semio­lo­gy” by film theo­rist Patri­ce Blouin, whe­re he sta­ted, in regards to the Tour de France, that “[t]he open field spec­ta­tor pays for his ama­teu­rism with the high pri­ce of frus­tra­ti­on: hours of wai­ting for a light­ning pas­sa­ge.” This is cer­tain­ly true in most cases of pro­fes­sio­nal road cycling – as oppo­sed to the “moun­tain spec­ta­tor”, who “bene­fits from a natu­ral effect of slow-moti­on” –, but not for the Ron­de van Vla­an­de­ren. As I was quick to dis­co­ver by mys­elf, the appeal of the Fle­mish sea level, with its pic­tures­que small towns and crow­ded pubs and this well-known desi­re for cycling – as spec­ta­cle, pra­xis, topic of con­ver­sa­ti­on – is not some­thing you can shrug off wit­hout an effort. That’s how I ended up spen­ding the after­noon in Ouden­aar­de, the finis­hing loca­ti­on of the race, alt­hough I ori­gi­nal­ly meant to reach Kop­pen­berg, one of the decisi­ve clim­bs of the cour­se. But the pro­s­pect of a Kwa­re­mont (6,6%) – the beer, obvious­ly, not the hom­ony­mous climb – to be sip­ped among­st the locals, and the shi­ny show­ca­se of the De ron­de store – a Par­then­ope of sorts for cycling con­su­me­rism – took the bet­ter of my inten­ti­ons to head uphill.

Now, I have to say that back in Octo­ber 2021, when I wat­ched the Paris-Rou­baix fina­le on the famous velo­dro­me, soa­king wet as I was from hours spent in the stub­born rain of the Nord, I rea­li­zed that the­se on-site expe­ri­en­ces could ser­ve – if cer­tain con­di­ti­ons were met – as pipes fil­led with sheer emo­ti­on flowing in your direc­tion. The­se con­di­ti­ons, of cour­se, come tog­e­ther under the ide­al of a beau­tiful race, wha­te­ver that means. Beau­tiful, this year’s Ron­de sure­ly was. I could alre­a­dy see it coming some hours ear­lier when, over­loo­king the ful­ly packed Gro­te Markt in Ant­werp, Flo­ri­an Ver­meersch of Lot­to-Sou­dal blew a ram horn (!) and was ans­we­red by his team­ma­tes’ haka-like cele­bra­ti­on, quick­ly adopted by the crowd. Yet it’s not the enter­tain­ment sequence per se that inte­rests me, nor its cha­ris­ma­tic host, Vic­tor Cam­pen­aerts, whom I hoped to see up front at the end but didn’t; it’s this simp­le ges­tu­re by which Ver­meersch put his horn into his back pocket with a mat­ter-of-fact pose, as if the tex­ti­le fea­ture had been con­cei­ved for this pur­po­se all along.

With the horn pla­ced whe­re gels and bars are usual­ly kept, Ver­meersch dro­ve his team off-stage, con­clu­ding a moment of inter­ac­ti­vi­ty which other­wi­se con­tras­ted with a mono­to­no­us series of riders taking a smooth right turn, waving their hand, then going away. For all its resem­blan­ce of prin­ci­ple with tele­vi­sed cycling – the same land­scape (open field), ges­tu­re (peda­ling) and visu­al shape (pelo­ton) for hours – this pre­sen­ta­ti­on could only under­line the mas­si­ve, almost sho­cking dicho­to­my bet­ween the rider as show­man (or, in any case, hom­me de paro­le) and the rider as ath­le­te. It was not the­se fun­da­men­tal pla­ti­tu­des – “ama­zing spec­ta­tors”, “I love this race”, “glad to be here” – which ever­yo­ne kept say­ing over and over, amoun­ting to a hyp­no­tiz­ing show of excess, that ulti­m­ate­ly intrigued me. It was the super­im­po­si­ti­on bet­ween, say, Pogačar recei­ving a huge bot­t­le of cham­pa­gne, and the same Pogačar domi­na­ting all the clim­bs that did, as it lin­ge­red in my mind throug­hout the day in the form of an irre­du­ci­b­le montage.

The pre­sen­ta­ti­on was more than just glamo­rous show – it was also a ghost­ly cerem­o­ny, as the name of Wout van Aert, the absent VIP of the race, lan­ded on everyone’s lips, eit­her in dis­may or in reli­ef. Yet the men con­ten­ding for the cob­ble pri­ze this year see­med deter­mi­ned to out­live his shadow. They rode with par­ti­cu­lar gene­ro­si­ty towards ener­gy was­te. Pogačar – who else? – pro­ved capa­ble of chan­ging the rules of the game by hims­elf, stor­ming past the pelo­ton as if on an elec­tric bike. Only Kas­per Asgreen, for a brief peri­od, and Mathieu Van der Poel, the reven­ant, were able to respond. Yet it all got out of hand in the last few hundred meters, after what loo­ked like a per­fect col­la­bo­ra­ti­on bet­ween the two lea­ders, who con­trol­led the last 30 kilo­me­ters at a ste­ady pace. But after all this effort, so inten­se it made ever­yo­ne in Oudenaarde’s cen­tral squa­re keep silent in awe, Pogačar tried to play it safe: the gra­tui­tous ges­tu­re tur­ned into sel­fi­sh­ness. It doesn’t take more to invo­ke the wrath of the gods of cycling. The­re was this incre­di­ble moment when, thanks to the fron­tal video came­ra, all noti­ons of per­spec­ti­ve beca­me inef­fec­ti­ve, and it was sud­den­ly unclear whe­ther the two in front were within reach for the two men who set off in pur­su­it. As it tur­ned out, the gap had inde­ed clo­sed in – so much so that Pogačar found hims­elf in the unli­kely posi­ti­on of losing both a mas­si­ve sprint and a tight breaka­way. De Ron­de was actual­ly test­ing hybrid vehic­les in its own way.

The image of the day was not, howe­ver, the one with Pogačar rai­sing his arms in deep frus­tra­ti­on, alt­hough it did occur almost simul­ta­neous­ly. Inde­ed, one could make out the sil­hou­et­te of a man jum­ping bey­ond the pro­tec­tion fence and advan­cing down the road just as the remai­ning car­ré des as was sprin­ting for vic­to­ry. And if this act beca­me an image, it was not by means of reck­less­ness – what’s this com­pared to the woman who cau­sed the crash of the enti­re pelo­ton on the last Tour de France? – but through a sort of poe­tic rever­se shot to the actu­al race. Of cour­se, the mes­sa­ge that was dis­play­ed in big capi­tal let­ters on this man’s chest – CLIMATE JUSTICE NOW – was no news in its­elf, and it would have pro­ba­b­ly gone unno­ti­ced in the vici­ni­ty of a For­mu­la 1 pit-stop. Yet deman­ding cli­ma­te chan­ge awa­re­ness behind the non-moto­ri­zed wheels of Van der Poel and the likes sud­den­ly see­med to call for an in-depth exami­na­ti­on. This per­son cle­ar­ly belon­ged to ano­ther sce­na­rio of De Ron­de. But he somehow par­ti­ci­pa­ted in the same glo­bal move­ment of dis­car­ding uto­pi­as that we expe­ri­ence ever­y­whe­re now. His mes­sa­ge allu­ded to the end of the dream: we were to go back into the real world, with its wars and its dise­a­ses. It was pain­ful, like light burs­t­ing into the movie thea­ter at the end of an old clas­sic. Eating a cone of French fries on a pub ter­race in Ouden­aar­de, try­ing to catch a glim­pse of the action as it unfold­ed on a small TV screen that was obs­truc­ted by fans moving all around, I sud­den­ly had the visi­on of a flee­ting moment of beau­ty that blos­so­med in the midst of chaos.