Sidetracked Magazine Issue 20 Cover

[Wotsits]

Who the f is Toyah ?

(Please.... )

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=khkKfMotNoI

[lune ranger]

I just had to wash my eyes

[thenorthwind]

Can you make MUCH smaller ones too? I can think of an alternative use in this freezing weather...

Would you not want a full enclosure though? Having the, er, third element dangling out of the hole might create a rather uncomfortable temperature gradient!

@northwind - I hesitate in posting this, as it could be misconstrued as a dig at you, which it isn't.
I wonder if your reaction is because you see Sidetracked as being a bit niche and discerning, in a leisure pursuit that is becoming ever closer to mainstream? Is it a bit like when something you don't agree with crops up in your social media feed and the instant reaction is "WTF, that doesn't belong here"? Or, when something crops up on here that gets huffed and puffed at, and ridiculed?

Don't worry - no offence taken, and happy to have my reaction questioned: kind of why I posted really (that and to see how long before this lot start making cock jokes ).

It's a good question, and there's definitely something in that. I think it was intended to provoke a reaction because it's not what I've come to expect from the cover of Sidetracked, and it's achieved that. At risk of protesting too much, I'm not really sure it's to do with niche vs. mainstream... more commercialism vs. "independence". On that topic, I exchanged comments with the editor, John Summerton, on Instagram, and he said "I guess the only thing I would say is that removing support from an independent magazine that does its very best to present unique and interesting stories and also supports independent projects is only going to force us further down this rabbit hole. " My response was to question what "independent" means in this context - surely it implies independence from an external influence that has some sort of vested interest (usually financial) in its message? Sidetracked isn't owned by a big publisher who might want to push some political agenda (cf. most newspapers) but if an advertiser pays for an article, it's hardly independent is it?

I suspect most of us on here would, to a degree, wish that bike packing remained a fringe and rather strange past time.

Maybe. I'd like to think I don't feel strongly that way, in itself. There are disadvantages that widespread popularity brings, sure - people participating irresponsibly (see fires, etc.); cheap mass-produced gear that gets used a couple of times, fails, then ends up in landfill; etc. - but those are separate problems. I'd be happy if bikepacking was as popular as football, but everyone did it responsibly.

EDIT - so it seems to be available online, and if the article is the same as the printed version, there's no discussion of sustainability is there? Seemed to be about the importance of story telling, myth and history/folklore in climbing. Alongside lots of pics of the guys in NF/Gucci togs. Gucci’s creative director is a climber it seems and a mate of Chin?
If I was a subscriber, I'd be struggling to see the value to me of the article in terms of inspiration or education or whatever. It's filler text at best with pictures of branded clothing, some of which is clearly on the wrong side of Form:Function.

I'd assumed it was only going to be in the print mag, and wasn't really sure I wanted to buy it, but I went for a look and yes, it's on there website, but seems to be three separate articles: one fairly abstract and tenuous thing about storytelling and climbing (my cynicism maybe colouring my reaction here), one where Chin and Leto discussing climbing ethics (the actual content, if self-indulgent), and one explicitly about the TNF/Gucci collabration: https://www.sidetracked.com/fieldjourna ... ploration/

Sustainability and ethical production are discussed though the details are a bit scant: they've come up with a regenerated (is that recycled? Or a watered-down equivalent thereof?) fabric, and they have an ethical policy (like a significant proportion of larger brands now) which they've also branded: Gucci Equilibrium. Presumably we have to go to there website if we want to find out what that actually means in practice though.

I was saddened to notice that the money-shot third article was written by Jenny Tough, someone whose writing and films I've always liked. She's obviously sponsored and a lot of her "content" fairly obviously so, but I'm not really bothered as long as it's not obtrusive. She's got to make a living. Similar to your point about Tom Hill, etc.

A quote from the article: "In a move that has surprised some, Gucci and The North Face – brands that share similar history and values – have joined forces". This strikes me as somewhat post-truth... that former outdoor brand turned street fashion label, and haut couture fashion house? They're very similar... and always have been... don't know why you'd think otherwise... ... OK

[RIP]

ū

Who the f is Toyah ?

(Please.... )

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=khkKfMotNoI

Noooo-o-o don't bring that up again, we've only just recovered from last time!

[AndreR]

I just had to wash my eyes

You're lucky you didn't loose one!

[jameso]

EDIT - so it seems to be available online, and if the article is the same as the printed version, there's no discussion of sustainability is there? Seemed to be about the importance of story telling, myth and history/folklore in climbing. Alongside lots of pics of the guys in NF/Gucci togs. Gucci’s creative director is a climber it seems and a mate of Chin?
If I was a subscriber, I'd be struggling to see the value to me of the article in terms of inspiration or education or whatever. It's filler text at best with pictures of branded clothing, some of which is clearly on the wrong side of Form:Function.

Hardly gets into the fashion/sustainability/outdoors mindset etc links does it? Nothing much beyond "Gucci creative director Alessandro Michele decided to team up with The North Face in an effort to create fashion that has a longer life; many of the fabrics are made from regenerated materials."
and

Jared: I guess maybe it takes an outsider to see it, but it’s the expectations that you have of yourselves about your behaviour, your stewardship of the outdoors, your accountability.

This may be a way to lead into it, it may be a bit of brand attention-seeking. We'll see. Sometimes what someone needs to do is lob in a grenade kind of point/image etc to get off one track and get the next point talked about. Patagonia have been doing the right thing for decades yes, but that's part of their challenge now - it's risking being old, 'that thing Patagonia do' to too many people rather than the way all brands should be. The whole sustainability thing has been a big topic in the outdoor clothing industry for a number of years already now so it'll be interesting to see if anything more comes from this.

[AndreR]

Being a cynical bolshie old git...Is it just me or was the emphasis back in the day more about what you did, where you went and how much fun you had (or didn't as the case may be) but now it's all about what gear you need, how techie and cool it is and how much money you spent??

When did it become about the stuff rather than the doing?? When did the toys become more important than playing with them??

Just thought to add, present companynexcluded!

[jameso]

^
Hasn't really changed much in the 30+ years I've been into bikes, imo. No more or less about product now vs then. tbh I don't think they toys have ever rated above the places they're used or what they enable us to do, not outside of the usual mags and product-driven websites anyway. Maybe we just see more of the product side of it online now.

[boxelder]

Being a cynical bolshie old git...Is it just me or was the emphasis back in the day more about what you did, where you went and how much fun you had (or didn't as the case may be) but now it's all about what gear you need, how techie and cool it is and how much money you spent??

When did it become about the stuff rather than the doing?? When did the toys become more important than playing with them??

Kate Tempest agrees with that sentiment:

"Nothing you can buy will ever make you more whole
This whole thing thrives on us feeling always incomplete"

"Happiness, the brand, is not happiness
We are smarter than they think we are
They take us all for idiots
But that's their problem
When we behave like idiots
It becomes our problem
So hold your own
Breathe deep on a freezing beach
Taste the salt of friendship
Notice the movement of a stranger
Hold your own
And let it be
Catching"

[AndreR]

Being a cynical bolshie old git...Is it just me or was the emphasis back in the day more about what you did, where you went and how much fun you had (or didn't as the case may be) but now it's all about what gear you need, how techie and cool it is and how much money you spent??

When did it become about the stuff rather than the doing?? When did the toys become more important than playing with them??

Kate Tempest agrees with that sentiment:

"Nothing you can buy will ever make you more whole
This whole thing thrives on us feeling always incomplete"

"Happiness, the brand, is not happiness
We are smarter than they think we are
They take us all for idiots
But that's their problem
When we behave like idiots
It becomes our problem
So hold your own
Breathe deep on a freezing beach
Taste the salt of friendship
Notice the movement of a stranger
Hold your own
And let it be
Catching"

[BigdummySteve]

^
Hasn't really changed much in the 30+ years I've been into bikes, imo. No more or less about product now vs then. tbh I don't think they toys have ever rated above the places they're used or what they enable us to do, not outside of the usual mags and product-driven websites anyway. Maybe we just see more of the product side of it online now.

I’d agree, didn’t stop me lusting after XTR or nicer toe clips (remember riding them off road!) the tragic thing now is decent outdoors brands being adopted as fashion items, mainly due to the fact that they cost lots and not due to performance leading to a reduction in quality/prices so as to shift more units.

[thenorthwind]

Being a cynical bolshie old git...Is it just me or was the emphasis back in the day more about what you did, where you went and how much fun you had (or didn't as the case may be) but now it's all about what gear you need, how techie and cool it is and how much money you spent??

When did it become about the stuff rather than the doing?? When did the toys become more important than playing with them??

Just thought to add, present companynexcluded!

I'd agree with James largely (though my sampling period is shorter). You definitely come across people who are clearly more keen on the kit than the activity, but I think there a minority. Maybe the rest discuss it a bit more than in the past due to the myriad options for every last thing, which is both good and bad.

[Bearlegged]

Due to an administrative mix up, I have two spare copies of issue 20.
Would anyone like one? Just pay postage, (and maybe bung the bear or your local MRT a couple of quid if you're feeling flush).

[ledburner]

Please I'd give it a punt, I'll make a donation. Hungary bear. I've PM'd you.

[Bearlegged]

Both now spoken for.

[Alpinum]

Just Patagucci.

A 6 years late response by a some magazine.

A 20 year late response to what you got to see walking through Chamonix after doing some stupid things on the steep faces of the granite spires above town.

Some might remember Valandré's ads "don't wear this [down jacket] in town/for shopping etc.

When outdoor clothing becomes fashion.

When it comes to sustainability, the main difference between Patagonia (and some other outdoor brands) and Gucci (and others...) is, that Gucci does less greenwashing.