Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Topic Date User

Rock Magazine - new ed 9-Oct-2012 At 5:21:31 PM Will_P

Message

Spring 2012 edition arrived last night, and took all of 90 minutes max to digest cover-to-cover, but I've never expected 'Alpinist'. Overall, slightly improved by the articles - though they still need (further? more?) proofreading and editing (editing as in 'at this point you sound a bit like a tosser, which is not in keeping with the rest of the article - why don't you rephrase it like this?'. And it'd be nice to have the author's name attached - I figured it was Maccazia writing, rather than Simon or Monique, about the 32 crack, but had to get through a few paragraphs first. And while the cover did mention it, it would've been nice to have Mike Law's name attached to his work (or was it Michael Law? There was both a Mikl and Michael Law in the 'Contributors', and while I know they both exist, did they really both contribute to this edition? (If so, I take back my superior tone) The Japan article was okay (though strangely specific); the mixed climbing article was okay - I like that there's some alpine stuff in the last few issues, either NZ or Tas, how about some further afield stuff? Damo666 or Radson have some stories to tell. The Grampians article seemed more about Arapiles, and contained some pretty random little anecdotes, but I'm sure they were of the 'if you'd been there you'd understand' kind. Biggest failures were the yoga article - no links made to climbing; the editorial and cover headline on bolting - editorial was strangely worded by someone who seems acquainted with only the very surface of the issue and an unfamiliarity of bolting per se (Neil, give the guy access to the Safer Cliffs forum and a tute, please!); the tone taken in the 'Beta' piece about the horrific murder of Jack Mileski (I might be overly sensitive, but it sounds like it's being glamorised yet is questionable, when it violently ended the life of a man who gave a lot to climbing, and to vulnerable members of his community); and, biggest fail, the two-page spread imploring us to support bricks-and-mortar retailers here in Aus, just before, turn the page... a two page 'rock gear' feature, featuring, yet again, products with the description and assessment taken straight from the manufacturers copy, and, rather than 'You can buy these at Rock Hardware or Climbing Anchors', the website of the manufacturer or distributor. I mean, you could be more hypocritical, but how? And seriously, testing gear and giving an honest review is not hard. Risky for the mag? Maybe a touch, but it'd give you credibility. You wouldn't have to pay anyone, and you could ensure it was constructive, if not positive. Loan me one of those BD helmets, I'll tell you how it compares to all the others I've worn. Loan me the Garmin GPS watch, I'll compare it to my, um, non-GPS Suunto. Open up the gear testing to the public, it's the easiest first step to getting your mag back on track.