Kinda disappointed that they ignored my above suggestions, but that said, the latest issue arrived on Christmas Eve, and while my expectations were low (like, Argus-level low) [sorry Shortman, but y'know it's true], I was mostly impressed.
The editor recusing himself and getting Mike Law to write the (somewhat pointed!) editorial was a good start. A decent interview with Chris Webb-Parsons followed (and a pretty ordinary one with Mayan Smith-Gobat - note to interviewer-who-was-not-named: New Zealanders don't think jokes about their accent are funny; most nationalities don't; the 'kia ora bru!' line was just dumb). Three well-written, inspiring, engaging pieces about some adventurous climbing were the highlights – Alaska, NZ, and Canada. The best part about these – trips done by “mere mortals”, names you likely haven’t heard of, making it easier to believe you (and I) could do the same thing. A couple of grammatical errors in a couple of these pieces detract not from the whole article, but reflect poorly on the editor. But there were weaknesses. The piece about Croft & Honnold, written by the editor? Seriously, did you justify a trip to the US to do this piece? To spend time in Yosemite with two of the greatest climbers of their respective generations, and produce writing that is so… nothing… you really don’t climb at all, do you, Mr. Editor? That’s a shame, because that could’ve been the Rock highlight of the year. And there’s the mislabelling of the photos in the article by Steve Morris on ropes and rope care. And, of course, the ‘Rock Gear’ section. At least you’re not calling it a review, but three pages of new(ish) products with the manufacturers verbatim description is neither useful nor interesting. Actual, objective gear reviews are.
Overall, a great improvement. If it can be maintained I might even think about accepting another gift subscription for my birthday again next year.
Interested to hear other's thoughts... |