i remember when MBUK was ful of those malverns bombhole errors. There was a good reason for the crowds stood round them:)

All it needed was a bit of a pre jump to keep you on the ground 😉

Although there were some nice stylin’ jumps out of them too…

“The way we were”

I’ll preface my remarks by saying that I am not easily pleased, and I have scant interest in the machines we use while riding, but I was favourably disposed to a new magazine, hoping to be surprised!

“Privateer” is subscription only at present, and I think the first issue was free if you signed up for a direct debit – the next is due “late Feb 2011” and costing £25.50 for 3 issues. My copy arrived a few days ago, and initial impressions were favourable, it’s a chunky perfect bound 210x260x10mm of heavy, glossy-eggshell finish paper. It feels more like a brochure than a magazine, and smells quite bad at first, though I’m happy to report the smell goes after a couple of days – or you stop noticing it 🙂

The cover shot is very good – a rider on some tempting singletrack silhouetted against a blue sky, and it was some time before I realised it wraps round onto the back cover too 🙂 The editorial gets off to a good start saying that it’s for riders who don’t need to be told what to buy, and have mountain biking deeply ingrained into them, but then blows it for me with the tawdry alliteration of “blood, bruises and beer” – why was there any need to drag recreational drugs into this ? This is followed by 2 mock (or possibly real) 120 film frames of rather bad shots of some Alpine downhill complete with vignetting and a nasty blue cast. Then things look up with a piece by Jenn Hopkins about her stint at the Megavalanche – though in retrospect I’m left wondering if she was the token woman in the otherwise unrelenting blokism. From here unfortunately we start to descend into a grim tale of nostalgia and celebrity awe, kicked off by a Charlie Kelly (who he ?) who loses no time in namechecking Gary Fisher <<shiver>>. I have no doubt that these figures played an important part in the genesis of mountain biking – someone should definitely write a book about it for someone to buy for me so I can leave it unread on the coffee table – and I wouldn’t have minded a page or 2, but this is followed by an article featuring various greying figures I’ve never heard of talking about the early mountain biking event scene – though it was relieved by a popup quote “Mountain biking is a pastime not a sport. The only reason for riding your bike in the mud is because it’s fun!” which is the high point of the issue for me 🙂 Then we have “Types of air”, which describes how we would all be getting big air if only we had the nerve, and I find no fault with this at all. Unfortunately, next comes a dire piece about early mountain biking in Haight and Marin County, featuring endless quotes by the inevitable Gary Fisher – I swear I had nothing against this man till I opened this magazine! It also has several photos of Gary complete with white moustache which made me want to kick him 🙁 I should mention that this goes on for AGES, 16 pages in all! Next is a prose panegyric to the mechanic, featuring lots of photos of mechanics being butch and/or holding bits of metal, together with the lame quote “Mechanics are the hardest working party animals on the tour…” etc, with another fatuous reference to drinking, and oh, I forgot to mention that Gary made several references to other recreational drugs, without which doubtless MTB would have fallen flat on its face at inception…

Next comes “FORK WARS” about more MTB celebrities’ involvement with the coming of suspension to mountain bikes. I think I would have enjoyed this had it not been yet another slab of the weighty layer cake of regurgitated history. This is followed by some piccies. These are agreeably timeless, and feature a beautiful shot of some sunlit woodland singletrack which I love to bits (p122). Unfortunately the paper finish does the other photos no favours and a lot of the shadows (and there are a lot) end up merely murky. Then a piece by Brant. I have no idea what it was about, or perhaps the point was, it was just stream of consciousness and not really about anything. Also it was nice and short. But oh dear, bringing up the rear is an article about retrobiking (or is it?). Thankfully one of the protagonists realised he was sinking into a pointless obsession and stopped licking his collection of MTB tat, sold most of it off and started riding again. Otherwise we have bikes degenerating into collectables, useless commodities gathering dust or being shown off, pristine and unridden. It’s like biking apart from actually being fetishism 🙁

I wanted to love it, but I ended up almost angry at the lost opportunities. As far as I can see the editorial promise has been abandoned for a collection of articles which pander to the worst aspects of mountain bikers. I’m starting to feel its remit was impossible, perhaps the nature of riding in its immediacy cannot be written about usefully in this format. Maybe poetry is required instead. I don’t know. I didn’t intend a hatchet job, and I know it’s far easier to criticise than it is to create. The best I can hope is that people will be so incensed by what I’ve written they will rise up in defence of Privateer. I honestly wish it well, but I’m not holding my breath. I’ve concluded that I should stop trying to read about biking and just get on with it!

barns why the **** would someone not interested in moutainbikes subscribe to a mtb magazine?????????????????????????

you do talk some utter **** shyte sometimes.
seriously.

why the **** would someone not interested in moutainbikes subscribe to a mtb magazine?

simple, I’m interested in riding and I’d hoped this would tell me something interesting about it. One can like riding bikes without being interested in bikes in the same way one can enjoy walking without obsessing about shoes. Obviously the distinction is lost on you ton 🙂

you do talk some utter **** shyte sometimes.

I’m entitled to my opinion and opportunity to rant once in a while, just like everyone else. You in turn are welcome to ignore me, or pick holes in my criticism as you see fit.

I’ve concluded that I should stop trying to read about biking and just get on with it!

……or do us all a favour and stop writing…..period!

My only regret is that I wasted a few seconds reading that pile of ‘critical’ crap written by someone who is only really interested in one thing….his own opinion.

“Privateer” is subscription only at present,

No its not. I ordered issue 1 from always riding for 9 quid

barnes you spend every breathing moment either on here, or riding your bike/photoing bikes, yet you have no interest in bikes.

BOLLOXS…………. 😆

yet you have no interest in bikes

truthfully. The only time my (singular) bike gets any attention is when I have to fix it. Otherwise I ignore it and all others.

No its not. I ordered issue 1 from always riding for 9 quid

thanks for the update, I must have misread their email.

i suppose you dont like ladies arses either…………. 🙄

barnes you spend every breathing moment either on here, or riding your bike/photoing bikes, yet you have no interest in bikes.

BOLLOXS………….

You know how on a group ride people will start talking about their bikes, about other bikes, about kit, clothing, lights etc etc.
Or when describing someone whose name you can’t remember you’ll say “yeah, it was the guy on the [insert bike name here]”.

Try that with SFB and he won’t even have noticed the colour of the bike never mind the make!
I’m willing to bet that he won’t know the make/model of half the components on his own bike (never mind anyone else’s bike!) without actually looking at it. 🙂

Have to say that I agree with a lot of what SFB has said. As I mentioned in an earlier post I will reserve final judgement until I see the next issue but from what I have read so far I’m not holding my breath!!

just have to say, whatever simon said about the new comic has no interest to me.
i no longer buy bike comics………they are all dire as far as i am concerned.
i was just commenting on simon saying he had no interest in bikes……..which he obviously has……. 🙄

I’m willing to bet that he won’t know the make/model of half the components on his own bike

not exactly true as I have to know what to buy when they wear out. But this is pragmatism, not interest.

i suppose you dont like ladies arses either

it’s just your day for being wrong isn’t it ton ?

So the new magazine is shite then?

Could it be that there is a really small pool of folk that write about mtbing and we have reached saturation point for their output?

So the new magazine is shite then?

it’s not as simple as that. It’s nicely produced (once the smell goes). I would say a lot of effort went into making it, but perhaps they got so wrapped up in the mechanics of production that they forgot about the content and kinda sleepwalked into doling out simultaneously condescending (to us) and sycophantic stodge. Brant was entertaining in a scatty way. Jenn’s Megavalanche may have been good but I didn’t read it. The retrobiking held a kind of grim fascination, reminiscent of “Embarrassing Bodies” – I read it with incredulous raised eyebrows…

I don’t really notice what bikes people ride either.

I think folk confuse bikes and biking. For me at least, riding is about what happens between your ears and the people you ride with, the kit is secondary to that – I find a lot of current magazines unsatisfying because they seem to put things the other way round and everything is about upgrading parts and finding ‘the right bike’ that will ‘transform your riding’.

Of course it’s much harder to write well about riding and I don’t think it’s easy to write well about anything to start with, so I guess it’s not that surprising that really good mountain bike prose is in short supply. I kind of hope that Privateer will fill that gap. But I haven’t read it. And it does seem quite expensive.

I sometimes think that the deeper people are immersed in an activity, the harder it is for them to see the big strokes. One of the best books about climbing I’ve ever read was actually written by a non-climber. It’s called Summit Fever and it’s by a Scottish poet and novelist called Andrew Greig. He has a head start because he writes quite beautifully to begin with, but what makes the book, is that he’s far enough outside climbing and the whole mountaineering community to see the big picture and the things about an expedition that the participants now take for granted.

The end result is an incredibly perceptive dissection of the social physiology of a group of ultra-competitive climbers that tells you more about mountaineering than any number of ‘classic’ expedition accounts.

Without that perspective, you’re just lost in a mirror.

Anyway, not saying that people shouldn’t write and read about kit and kit history, but for me the bike is integral and coincidental at the same time.

Hmmm… I think I’ll go to bed now 😐

but for me the bike is integral and coincidental at the same time.

fantastic! Well said!

Here’s my analogy. I like to **** women, but at least as much I’m fascinated by them, the way the look and move and think their own ideas, often in marked contrast to my own thinking, they surprise and enthrall endlessly, and they can be kind enough to return the fascination. A bike is nothing like that. It’s a lump of inert stuff, it has no thoughts, no preferences, it doesn’t care if I live or die, the best I can expect of it is that it totally efface itself from my awareness so I can concentrate on the experience, shared with other people. People matter, some people anyway, things don’t.

But actually I love my bikes because they’re what enables me to ride and I have real affection for them because of that. But it’s because of places and people and feelings – they can be inanimate things and repositories for emotion at the the same time.

It’s like the whole of people obsessing over scratches and dents, they’re just war wounds, tangible memories of rides. Shininess and perfection sucks. It’s an illusion. Reality is broken and shaded and has scratches on and I wouldn’t have it any other way.

the best I can expect of it is that it totally efface itself from my awareness so I can concentrate on the experience, shared with other people.

So do you not ride alone, ever?

Oh, and women are just people…

also quite true 🙂

So do you not ride alone, ever?

in the last 5 years just once, before Xmas last year when no one would risk driving in the snow:)

Reading SfB’s essay ( 😉 ) I have to say that the fears I posted above (about Privateer being an expensively produced version of ST) appear to be true.

Could it be that there is a really small pool of folk that write about mtbing and we have reached saturation point for their output?

I think so, coupled with there not being enough for these people to write about.

in the last 5 years just once, before Xmas last year when no one would risk driving in the snow:)

Still, at least you found a friendly tree. I like both, all three in fact – solo, trees and people.

Reading SfB’s essay ( ) I have to say that the fears I posted above (about Privateer being an expensively produced version of ST) appear to be true.

Maybe you should read it yourself before jumping to conclusions based on someone else’s preferences? This is a man who seeks out trees when he can’t find people to ride with after all 😉

BWD – I have it and fully intend to read all of it.

My comments above about it’s closeness to the sixth form lite of ST appeared to bear some truth in a quick skim, so it’s interesting that SfB’s iconoclastic approach would seem to align with this impression.

Your contribution is also interesting – I’ll check out that book.

This is a man who seeks out trees when he can’t find people to ride with after all

didn’t the tree find me ? I’m fascinated by the way a single xmas tree grows in a blasted wasteland, and every year some hardy souls climb up there to decorate it 🙂

And I never said don’t read it and form your own opinions. The stuff that left me cold might suit you to a tee. I wanted to be challenged and surprised – and perhaps that’s asking too much. I did get surprise, but not in a good way 🙁

I also thought it was interesting that it’s slated to become fetishised itself, just like the retrobikes. Crazy-legs told me to be sure to keep my copy as issue one of Rouleur now sells at £200 due to its rarity value. Of course, my copy is already foxed as I had it stuffed haphazardly in my pack, and I plan to loan it out to anyone interested…

I don’t feel strong attachment to physical things. If I lose or break things, there is momentary woe and then I soon move on. But there are some exceptions – bikes for one.

In fact one might posit an inverse relationship between number of books about a topic and its inherent interest

or an inverse relationship between the number of opinionated comments and the worth of that opinion.

or an inverse relationship between the number of opinionated comments and the worth of that opinion.

or your opinion of my opinion?
I felt betrayed, but here’s the thing, anyone else can post their review or rant too 🙂

2retro4u
Marin County, Cali

Sorry if my bit didn’t meet with Barnes’ approval. Tym asked me to give him 1000 words on…something. Try it sometime. WTF is there to say about mountain biking that hasn’t been said a million times?

I went with a thought I had while riding the first trail I ever tried BITD, now some 35 years later and I’m on an amazing piece of machinery by comparison to that first day, with the name of the guy I rode with that day on the frame.

It’s the kind of experience everybody else hasn’t had, and it’s connected with mountain biking, so that’s what I wrote about. I’m sure the magazine will be happy to take submissions from anyone else who has a unique point of view on some aspect of the sport. All it takes is 1000 words.

Be original.

Repack Rider

my apologies RR 🙂 Any one bout of nostalgia would have been fine, just not an overdose!

Ace website Charlie.

Not read Privateer, but I can certainly see the point of slightly more expensive magazines with higher production values and fewer adverts. Normal monthly mags are mostly knocking on for a fiver these days, paying a few quid more for something you’re going keep and refer back to in years to come seems OK to me. Or you can flog them – my back issues of poncey music mags like Wax Poetics have fetched more than enough to justtify the walk to the post office when I’ve stuck them on eBay.

In the past I’ve never had much time for stories about mountain biking’s history either, then earlier this year I bought a copy of this in a charity shop for a quid, and was utterly riveted. When you realise how richly mixed the heritage of mountain biking is – you’ve got motocross, clunkers, BMX, rough stuff cycle tourers, motorbike trials riders like Geoff Apps – it’s potentially just as interesting as any other sport. Certainly a bit more fascinating to me than a 50-page spread on Eddy Mercx’s arse pimples.

Ultimately we all have limited attention spans for any subject matter, if you’re bored of reading about bikes it’s not necessarily an indication that the writing’s bad.

, if you’re bored of reading about bikes it’s not necessarily an indication that the writing’s bad.

very true! I wasn’t able to form an opinion about the writing because I was so irritated about its content – however, does shovelling bucketloads of nostalgia, however well written, form an adequate basis for a thrusting new magazine ?

I was talking to my wife about the difficulty of producing a monthly magazine the other day. For most subjects – bikes, cars, relationships, s3x advice, interior design or whatever, everything that can be written has been written. Each month is essentially a rehash with, in the case of biking (and may the other categories) some showcasing of new technology offering increasingly diminishing improvements.

I’m not dissing writers and publishers, quite the opposite as trying to keep recycled stuff feeling fresh must be a he’ll of a challenge but it does explain why I no longer subscribe to magazines

… and of course, this new venture isn’t monthly but bimonthly, so it’s not obliged to be topical, though one might hope this didn’t mean it had to be instead celebrity-stuffed nostalgia…

Kind of agree with SFB, I do like the history stuff and so far there’s not a single article I’ve not found intesesting, but there’s a hell of a lot of it, and I’m already feeling a bit over-retro’d.

Some mags are about bikes, some are about riding, Singletrack and Dirt manage to be a lot about riding, I think this one has ended up being a bit more about bikes. Which is fine but all the blurb I saw suggested it was going to be the other way round. And certainly it feels odd for the newest magazine to be the most backwards-looking.

Still, I’m enjoying it and not regretting subscribing. I’m just going to take it slower, read an article every so often rather than going cover to cover the way I usually do with mags as I think I’ll OD and stop enjoying it.

Nostalgia or history?

Love him or loathe him, there’s no denying that Gary Fisher did play a big part in the development of the modern mountain bike. I do get a bit sick of the US-centric view of places like the MTB Hall of Fame, where everyone who held a stopwatch at Repack seems to have been inducted, while ignoring people like Geoff Apps and Adrian Carter, but that’s hardly Gary Fisher or Charlie Kelly’s fault.

I do find it edifying to know a bit about a sport’s roots, even if it is just the realisation that an incredible amount of research, refinement and development has gone into modern mountain bikes, and yet what I do of a weekend isn’t that fundamentally different from what some people were doing 30 years ago.

I think I feel a vital part of mountain biking is its undeniable immediacy. I suppose I have some theoretical interest in how it came about, but what really interests me is what happens HERE and NOW in the moment, and how we got here doesn’t matter much.

Isn’t it entirely reasonable and proper that a new mag should bear more than a passing nod to the history of the sport as well as its progression. It is, after all, a 1st edition!!

I would be just as interested in CK’s article as one by say Steve Peat. Entirely different perspectives (or are they?) and generations but still about mtb’ing and equally valid and interesting in their own right. To be only interested in the ‘here and now’ would be an impossible and very boring task for a magazine and the vast majority of its readers. Quite how you accomplish the ‘here and now’ as requested by SFB is impossible in a quality mag – that is what t’internet is about and while no doubt ‘immediate’ can be largely superficial and instantly forgettable.