I was just in the local Barnes & Noble looking through the magazine rack. I noticed that there were 4 or 5 slick surfing magazines and no kayaking magazines. While they typically do carry some, I find it amazing that here on the northeast coast where surfing is virtually non existent and sea kayaking is quite popular, that so much more shelf space would be devoted to surfing than kayaking. All these surfing magazines have very attractive covers. One is virtually an art publication. The whole image presented is interesting and exciting. How come sea kayaking is portrayed as boring? Is a picture of a low-end kayak, sitting calmly on smooth water really the image of sea kayaking that attracts us to the sport? Is this really the cover shot that is going to attract people to the sport? It seems to me that the enthusiastic sea kayakers participate in a different sport from what we see on the covers and inside the sea kayaking magazines. Wouldn't it be good for the sport if it was portrayed in the same way that the most enthusiastic experience it? While we are on the subject, who is happy with the new layout of Sea Kayaker Magazine? To me it looks like just another conglomerate produced enthusiast publication. The old layout was distinctive and at least somewhat interesting. Nick Schade Guillemot Kayaks 824 Thompson St Glastonbury, CT 06033 USA Ph/Fx: (860) 659-8847 http://www.guillemot-kayaks.com/ *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
> From: Nick Schade <nick_at_guillemot-kayaks.com> > All these surfing magazines have very attractive covers. One is > virtually an art publication. The whole image presented is interesting > and exciting. How come sea kayaking is portrayed as boring? Is a > picture of a low-end kayak, sitting calmly on smooth water really the > image of sea kayaking that attracts us to the sport? Is this really the > cover shot that is going to attract people to the sport? Actually, Nick, if the surf magazines were to present a "true" image of surfers, it would be a picture of group of surfers straddling their boards in a lineup waiting... and waiting... and waiting for a ride to come along. The real buzzphrase is "hang 20." :-) Jackie *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
> How come sea kayaking is portrayed as boring? Because for the most part it is :-)... Ever seen teenagers doing sea kayaking (not kayak surfing or whitevater kayaking, but exactly sea kayaking)? Is a > picture of a low-end kayak, sitting calmly on smooth water really the > image of sea kayaking that attracts us to the sport? Nope... But for many, if not for most, this is how it usually works :-), only kayaks are, perhaps, less low-end than those on magazine covers. Also, those advertised on covers often promote some particular destination, i.e. hotel and rental shop, not a kayaking manufacturing company. It's not a secret that rental shops in resorts are mostly oriented on entry-level crowd, and offer SOT or el-cheapo polyethilene boats. Is this really the > cover shot that is going to attract people to the sport? It depends - what people :-)... I think, there are also market reasons behind this scene. People own same sea kayaks for dozen(s) of years, but just look into any kayak-related Classifieds - hundreds of surf and ww kayaks for sale. And this is not because all this crowd suddenly stopped being surf- or ww-kayakers - just their boats became outmoded, because the industry introduced something new. Same goes for downhill skiing or snowboards, - compared to cross-country skiing. *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
With you 100% on this one, Nick. The newer, slicker format, with more white space, seems cheesy to me. I strongly prefer the old format. But, you and I are not entry-level enthusiasts, and I suspect SK's advertisers had a big influence in the new "look." Flash and dash over substance and content. -- Dave Kruger Astoria, OR ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nick Schade" <nick_at_guillemot-kayaks.com> > While we are on the subject, who is happy with the new layout of Sea > Kayaker Magazine? To me it looks like just another conglomerate produced > enthusiast publication. The old layout was distinctive and at least > somewhat interesting. *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
At 05:38 PM 12/20/2004 -0800, Dave Kruger wrote: >With you 100% on this one, Nick. The newer, slicker format, with more >white space, seems cheesy to me. I strongly prefer the old format. But, >you and I are not entry-level enthusiasts, and I suspect SK's advertisers >had a big influence in the new "look." > >Flash and dash over substance and content. Except for that article on Bracing Drills. Whoever wrote that is really good. BTW, I hope that Chris chimes in soon to respond to the criticism. I know that he subscribes to the list.
John Fereira wrote: > At 05:38 PM 12/20/2004 -0800, Dave Kruger wrote: > >> Flash and dash over substance and content. > > Except for that article on Bracing Drills. Whoever wrote that is really > good. Well...that's perhaps debatable ;), but it certainly wasn't an article designed to appeal to neophytes. If SK really were trying to move towards less hard-core articles, they'd scarely have printed that one. > BTW, I hope that Chris chimes in soon to respond to the criticism. I > know that he subscribes to the list. Several people have accused SK of going where the money is and essentially abandoning us fanatics. This may be a case of the perfect being the enemy of the good. I think SK is the best magazine for sea kayaking out there. Would you rather they focus on articles that appeal only to a small few, lose money, and cut back or fold? In publishing, survival means circulation and advertising. I don't really want to go back to photocopied newsletters. For the record, I think the new format is _graphically_ an improvement, as the old version was really old fashioned. I don't necessarily like it any better, myself. And I'm very far from being a graphics expert. -- Steve Cramer Athens, GA
At 12:00 PM 12/21/2004 -0500, Steve Cramer wrote: >John Fereira wrote: > >>At 05:38 PM 12/20/2004 -0800, Dave Kruger wrote: >> >>>Flash and dash over substance and content. >>Except for that article on Bracing Drills. Whoever wrote that is really good. > >Well...that's perhaps debatable ;), but it certainly wasn't an article >designed to appeal to neophytes. If SK really were trying to move towards >less hard-core articles, they'd scarely have printed that one. > >>BTW, I hope that Chris chimes in soon to respond to the criticism. I >>know that he subscribes to the list. > >Several people have accused SK of going where the money is and essentially >abandoning us fanatics. This may be a case of the perfect being the enemy >of the good. I think SK is the best magazine for sea kayaking out there. >Would you rather they focus on articles that appeal only to a small few, >lose money, and cut back or fold? In publishing, survival means >circulation and advertising. I don't really want to go back to photocopied >newsletters. It's not just publications. I know of three retail/rental shops for which survival is a real issue. Not only are they not profit mongers getting rich off a mass market of consumers, they're reevaluating whether or not they can stay in business when competing with mall outdoor stores staffed by people that may not have ever paddled a kayak.
On Dec 21, 2004, at 8:31 AM, John Fereira wrote: > At 05:38 PM 12/20/2004 -0800, Dave Kruger wrote: >> With you 100% on this one, Nick. The newer, slicker format, with >> more white space, seems cheesy to me. I strongly prefer the old >> format. But, you and I are not entry-level enthusiasts, and I >> suspect SK's advertisers had a big influence in the new "look." >> >> Flash and dash over substance and content. > > Except for that article on Bracing Drills. Whoever wrote that is > really good. That guy should be nominated for a Pulitzer. I don't think the content has changed that much with the new layout. Some months are better than others as always. I was actually hoping that the new layout would improve the look, with maybe a greater emphasis on quality photography on the cover. Instead the pictures are the same boring things but now overlaid with distracting writing. I would rather they tried to depend on the image to draw people in instead of loud writing. Nick Schade Guillemot Kayaks 824 Thompson St Glastonbury, CT 06033 USA Ph/Fx: (860) 659-8847 http://www.guillemot-kayaks.com/
> While we are on the subject, who is happy with the new layout of Sea > Kayaker Magazine? To me it looks like just another conglomerate > produced enthusiast publication. The old layout was distinctive and at > least somewhat interesting. > Good point Nick! I too feel that the new 'look' of Sea Kayaker is not as interesting visually as the former one. I suppose an editor of any magasine needs to 'update' the image now and then, but somehow, this version doesn't cut it for me. It's a personal opinion totally. In fact, it is much less the enthusiast's magasine than it used to be. It seems to be positioning itself more to the neophyte paddler and less to those of us who read it to learn something new or go someplace new. Is it because there are many more new paddlers out there than older ones and the market drives all? Is it time for a new magasine for us long time paddlers? Michael
> I noticed that there were 4 or 5 slick surfing magazines and no > kayaking magazines. While they typically do carry some, I find it > amazing that here on the northeast coast where surfing is virtually non > existent and sea kayaking is quite popular, that so much more shelf > space would be devoted to surfing than kayaking. > You haven't been to New Jersey lately, have you? Surfing is VERY popular along the shore here, and there have been several National championships contested here, including 2004... It might not be the monster waves of the Banzai Pipeline but there are consistent, good-sized waves to be had at many beaches. There's also a bunch of surfing websites here... There's also some very good SK clubs here as well but they seem to keep a lower profile. Joe P.
Generally, magazines had to appeal to the widest consumer market, and most of the time that refers to the young consumer eager to see the coolest photos and most interesting pieces of gear that they can get their hands on. As someone else had remarked, there is a big exchange market for river running and playboating gear which comes and goes every season. Likewise, climbing magazines more frequently feature strong sport climbers and bouldering sports doing impossible moves rather than seasoned climbers slowly making their way up natural routes. The former group of climbers will tend to consume those magazines rather than the latter, or rather, that's what the magazine publishers assume. Wanting to know that our sport is a popular activity probably makes us feel good, but ultimately glamorizing it will probably make our waterways more crowded, and bring risks to amateurs who jump into the sport. Perhaps for me, it's a way of wanting to always keep the beautiful for those who deserve it. It is good that famous peaks are unreachable for most people; pristine environments will not be preserved if visiting them is a walk in the park. Ong Yong Hui Singapore
In a message dated 12/20/2004 7:22:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, nick_at_guillemot-kayaks.com writes: While we are on the subject, who is happy with the new layout of Sea Kayaker Magazine? To me it looks like just another conglomerate produced enthusiast publication. The old layout was distinctive and at least somewhat interesting. That is why I very seldom buy Sea Kayaker Magazine anymore. I can remember when I actually subscribed to it and could hardly wait until the next issue. The bottom line is that profits rule.
At 09:41 AM 12/21/2004 -0500, Harley1941_at_aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 12/20/2004 7:22:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, >nick_at_guillemot-kayaks.com writes: > >While we are on the subject, who is happy with the new layout of Sea >Kayaker Magazine? To me it looks like just another conglomerate >produced enthusiast publication. The old layout was distinctive and at >least somewhat interesting. There have been a couple of complaints about the new layout but do you honestly think that the content has changed significantly?
I agree about SeaKayaker mag - it was better with the old layout. I get the feeling when leafing through SeaKayaker mag these day4s that it has surrendered to the almighty money. Both regarding choice of content and lookwise. cheers Snorri ------------------------------------------------------- ^etta skeyti er sent mep vefposti isl.is
Dave wrote (re: SK's new format): >>Flash and dash over substance and content. To which John Fereira responded: > Except for that article on Bracing Drills. Whoever wrote that is really > good. > BTW, I hope that Chris chimes in soon to respond to the criticism. I know > that he subscribes to the list. That is a good article, John. Well done. It is the kind of thing which I learn from, and which is the meat that keeps me subscribing to SK. We old granola paddlers get some goodies with every issue. Articles like the one on Belize are on the other side: kinda glitzy, kinda showy, but not much representative of what most folks get out of the sport. Yeah, I hope Chris does get on the horn and respond. I don't envy the role of steward for a publication these days. Lots of responsibility and headaches. There is no other similar forum for Sea Kayakers, and I suspect that there is not the ad revenue to support a second one. -- Dave Kruger Astoria, OR
At 08:43 AM 12/21/2004 -0800, Dave Kruger wrote: >Dave wrote (re: SK's new format): > >>>Flash and dash over substance and content. > >To which John Fereira responded: > >>Except for that article on Bracing Drills. Whoever wrote that is really good. > >>BTW, I hope that Chris chimes in soon to respond to the criticism. I >>know that he subscribes to the list. > >That is a good article, John. Well done. It is the kind of thing which >I learn from, and which is the meat that keeps me subscribing to SK. We >old granola paddlers get some goodies with every issue. > >Articles like the one on Belize are on the other side: kinda glitzy, >kinda showy, but not much representative of what most folks get out of the >sport. On the other hand, this was the February issue and articles on Belize may just provide the dreams that help get us northern kayakers through a long winter. Actually, Belize has been near the top of the list of one of the places that I would like to go someday. Exotic locations in publications are hardly the exclusive domain of paddling magazines. Ever read FlyFishing magazine?
I think we should strive to look as boring as possible. That way we are less likely to find our favorite campsites occupied when we get there. Chuck Holst
In a message dated 12/20/2004 4:22:05 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, nick_at_guillemot-kayaks.com writes: (I was just in the local Barnes & Noble looking through the magazine rack. I noticed that there were 4 or 5 slick surfing magazines and no kayaking magazines. While they typically do carry some, I find it amazing that here on the northeast coast where surfing is virtually non existent and sea kayaking is quite popular, that so much more shelf space would be devoted to surfing than kayaking.) There is so much more web space, too. In planning a late winter trip, the surfer websites are quite informative on places very rarely reported on in paddling circles. Whitewater is a much more popular sport than sea kayaking and its imagery of giant drops, nasty holes and first decents bring out the imagery of athletic exploration still lingering in most of our souls. I was disappointed to see only a few scenes of olympic kayaking made it onto the big screen. My forward apologies to runners or shot putters, but those translate to TV as well as weight lifting or reruns of Locomotion. Watching large greasy men wrestling each other somehow didn't do it for me, either. And yet 5-6 minutes was all the screen time they could manage for kayaking. It's not just the surfers who are eclipsing paddlers, its every sport. (All these surfing magazines have very attractive covers. One is virtually an art publication. The whole image presented is interesting and exciting. How come sea kayaking is portrayed as boring? Is a picture of a low-end kayak, sitting calmly on smooth water really the image of sea kayaking that attracts us to the sport? Is this really the cover shot that is going to attract people to the sport?) Because most of Sea Kayaking is boring. Picture yourself Nick, there you are on the pond looking at ducks in your 11 foot by 39 inch (fill in the blank). Look at C&K mag, with all of the alpine lake imagery, mountains embroidered on the surface of the water as viewed by a sea kayaker! A sea kayak on an alpine lake. Sounds pretty boring to me, too. Backpacking is far more athletic, exciting and capable of delivering a real wilderness experience than that kind of sea kayaking. I would rarely paddle unless there was a better way to paddle than the image you are speaking to. It seems to me that the enthusiastic sea kayakers participate in a different sport from what we see on the covers and inside the sea kayaking magazines. Wouldn't it be good for the sport if it was portrayed in the same way that the most enthusiastic experience it? Mostly, I do. Whitewater paddlers suggest often that if it is saltwater you are wasting your time. Those that suggest that are quite wrong, of course, but their image of sea kayaking comes from two sources. The first is the media, there goes Joe in his 11x39 and binoculars, get em tiger, they say. The second is quite visual, us. Most of the boats and the folks they see are not on the coast. It's only when the rivers are shriveled up do you see WW boaters surfing, as fun as it is, it doesn't have the same pull as a grade 3-4 river. While we are on the subject, who is happy with the new layout of Sea Kayaker Magazine? To me it looks like just another conglomerate produced enthusiast publication. The old layout was distinctive and at least somewhat interesting. The latest issue had a review of the kind of boat and design intent we are speaking to. Usually they are much better about that. They should look at the title of the magazine and draw the line at boats for that. If I see another article about Baja or the inside passage to Alaska I won't even remove it from my mailbox. They are running out of flatwater to report on and they'll soon be competing with C&K for alpine lake photo shoots. On the other hand, I cannot wait to see who spouts off about Justine Curgenven's article on Kamchatka. I can hear it now: How dare you take a raw beginner on an inhospitable wilderness coast full of bears and waves! What kind of representative of the sport are you Sea Kayaker? That is part of the problem, the *us* that have been so indoctrinated with Sea Kayak(er) Correctness that the editor can't even shoot a photo of his buddy sans PFD on a tropical millpond paddling an SOT without getting ripped by the public. It may be a sad state of imagistic affairs, but the campsites along the coast have little competition, still. Rob G
On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 11:49:07AM -0500, Rcgibbert_at_aol.com wrote: > I was disappointed to see only a few scenes of olympic kayaking made it onto > the big screen. My forward apologies to runners or shot putters, but those > translate to TV as well as weight lifting or reruns of Locomotion. Watching large > greasy men wrestling each other somehow didn't do it for me, either. And yet > 5-6 minutes was all the screen time they could manage for kayaking. It's not > just the surfers who are eclipsing paddlers, its every sport. TV is _entirely_ driven by the money. That's why Olympic program schedules are (at least here in the US) arranged as necessary to present the sports which draw the largest audience and/or competitions in which American athletes happen to do well. An excellent US performance in heptathlon will get (maybe) coverage of the final event and medal presentation, plus maybe a puff piece...whereas even a poor performance by the men's basketball team will covered uninterrupted for hours at a time. And so on: we all know the drill by now. (I can only hope that it's better elsewhere.) And people primarily want to watch the sports that they either do, or (secondarily) that they would like to do. So basketball and soccer, ice skating and hockey are emphasized, and team handball and biathlon aren't. And so kayaking isn't covered because not enough people want to watch to it, and the network(s) _know that_. Heck, even most of the paddlers I know didn't pay the slightest attention to the Olympic competition -- sprint or slalom -- and in part that's because even though they paddle, they can't relate to it. It's not part of their idea of paddling, it has no relevance to them, and they simply *do* *not* *care*. And having followed this (paddling in the Olympics) since slalom came back in '92, I can tell you that fewer people care every time it comes around. The sport has completely failed to capitalize on the momentum generated by its return in '92, and in fact has regressed badly ever since, becoming more and more elite, more and more removed from majority of paddlers. If it disappeared entirely at this point, few would notice or care. ---Rsk
On 22 Dec 2004 at 13:59, Rich Kulawiec wrote: > TV is _entirely_ driven by the money. That's why Olympic program > schedules are (at least here in the US) arranged as necessary to > present the sports which draw the largest audience and/or competitions > in which American athletes happen to do well. Too true. I get both the US and Canadian channels on cable and never watch the US coverage. It's little girls in tights doing gymnastics till ya puke. Winter Olympics is all figure skating. The Canadian channels actually show the Olympics. I watched all the kayaking events (flatwater and slalom) and got to see a few "kids" from the neighbourhood win medals (there are several kayak/canoe racing clubs nearby). The real problem is the virtual monopoly of the coverage. If there were two or more channels covering the Olympics, then they could compete for the grannies who watch cute kids or the sports fans who want to see competition. Mike Apologies to those who think little girls in tights doing gymnastics is a sport. :-)
On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 15:20:32 -0500, "Michael Daly" <mikedaly_at_magma.ca> said: The real problem is the virtual monopoly of the coverage. If there were two or more channels covering the Olympics, then they could compete for the grannies who watch cute kids or the sports fans who want to see competition. I was a judge at the 1996 Olympics for slalom. The TV people set up a camera stand in such a way that it partially blocked our view of one of the gates. Needless to say, it was not moved, nor was our judge's hut. Now the slalom races are much, much shorter and, starting this coming season, the boats will be, too. But when I started slalom racing there were a lot of old timers complaining about the dropping of the "free" gate and reducing the penalty for a missed gate from 100 seconds to "only" 50. So I guess change is always stressful. That said, if I was an Olympic athlete, I would probably appreciate the money that the coverage brings in. Jim Tibensky
On Thu, Dec 23, 2004 at 07:43:48AM -0600, James wrote: > Now the slalom races are much, much shorter and, starting this coming > season, the boats will be, too. But when I started slalom racing there > were a lot of old timers complaining about the dropping of the "free" > gate and reducing the penalty for a missed gate from 100 seconds to > "only" 50. So I guess change is always stressful. I'm not averse to change. As of next month, I'll hit 25 years on the Internet (and the ARPAnet before that): "change" is pretty much my life, to the point where it's now routine for something to be brand-new one year, a "best practice" the next, and truly stupid a couple of years later. I'm well-known among my peers for being the one who frequently advocates change at a far faster rate than any of them would. But I have a serious problem with "change for the sake of change" or "change without discussion and consent" or "change which primarily benefits the elite" or "change which drives people out of the sport" And that is exactly what has happened to slalom worldwide and in the US over the past decade-plus: the golden opportunity that was presented with the return of it to the Olympic Games in 1992, the hosting of the Olympic event here in the US in '96, and the wonderful US performances in both those Games...all have been thrown away. [ BTW: I was there at the Ocoee too. And despite my poor memory for names, I could swear I spent a day gate-judging with you at the Nationals on the Deerfield in 1993, and maybe bumped into you again when I was racing at the Nationals in Wausau in 1997? Or else I'm just having a senior moment. ;-) ] [ And those "wonderful US performances" include Scott Shipley's generosity in giving his boat to Samir Karabasic (Bosnia) who made it to the Games after being airlifted out of that war-torn country, but whose own kayak was destroyed by the Ocoee in practice. Some people thought Scott's performance in the competition was "disappointing" because he didn't wind up with a medal: I thought it was magnificent. ] Change was necessary, all right: for one thing, the 19th-century policy of the ICF with respect to female competitors should have been changed many years ago, as that policy is a world-wide disgrace to the sport: women are not permitted to compete in C-boats. So while there are C-1 and C-2 classes for men, there are none for women. And of course there is no C-2 mixed class, which means that my partner and I -- no matter how good we ever manage to get -- are banned from competing. Forever. (Similar policies exist in other disciplines besides slalom: sprint, wildwater, marathon, etc. are all marred by them, thanks to the ICF.) This is a vicious policy of gender discrimination that has no place in *any* sport, yet it persists because those who could change it in a single day -- with the stroke of a pen -- lack the ethics and courage to do so. How pitiful. How wrong. And change was necessary here in the US, too, as less than a thousand athletes actually participate in the sport, and only a few hundred of those do more than one race a year: clearly, something should have changed in order to attract many more people to the sport, and it should have been done right after Jacobi/Strausbaugh won gold in Barcelona (and let me not overlook Dana Chladek's bronze there and silver in Atlanta). But this is not kind of the change that happened. The change that happened was the switch from better-of-two runs to combined score -- a move that's driven more people out of the sport than anything else. (I know: I got a lot of them into it and they've told me in no uncertain times why they've left. They're done. And they've taken their money and their time, two scarce commodities, with them.) And now we have this silly change in boat lengths -- as if somehow, magically, that will bring more people into the sport. Never mind that most people who paddle whitewater seriously already have a bunch of boats, and routinely buy/sell/trade them to suit their interests and needs. Heck, I had 7 at one point, and that's hardly unusual. And besides, the need to buy a race-legal boat (for those few races that don't have classes for non-race boats) has NEVER, in all my years of racing, ever stopped a single person from participating in any race. Especially since it's quite routine for people to lend/borrow boats: I've been to races where my boats took 2-3 times as many trips down the course as I did. Oh, change is needed all right: *lots* of change. But rubber-stamping whatever change-for-the-sake-of-change is handed down from the idiots at the ICF isn't it. And until that's recognized, slalom (and wildwater, and sprint, and marathon, and...) will continue to decline. Oh, there will be some kids that get into it here and there, sure; but most of the _adults_, the ones whose participation is desperately needed as organizers and drivers and coaches and volunteers and financial supporters? They're staying away in droves. All you have to do is look at, oh, the competitor list for, say, the 1999 Nationals -- a mere five years ago -- and then see how many of the people over 30 are still involved in the sport in any role at all. ---Rsk *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
In a message dated 12/21/2004 8:31:48 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, jaf30_at_cornell.edu writes: Except for that article on Bracing Drills. Whoever wrote that is really good. Nice job to you and Duane for your contributions. I won't throw the babies out with the bathwater.
cholst_at_bitstream.net> wrote: >I think we should strive to look as boring as possible. That way we are > less likely to find our favorite campsites occupied when we get there That's the ying and yang in a nutshell, isn't it? High-profile features in popular media conflict with our expectation that our favorite, quiet haunts will remain so. I bet there are few among us who have __not__ obscured the location or access for a "favorite spot." Maybe the focus on exotic locations in SK mag is good ... keeps makers of paddling goodies supplied with fresh money, and sends the buyers of said goodies off to places we ain't. [Offered tongue-in-cheek: we can't have it both ways. To maintain access to good gear, we need to have a commercial marketplace where honest folks can make a living supplying us with gear we need. If those folks can't stay in business off us, then they need to branch out ... and promote. And that is part of what is happening in what I sloppily termed glitz and dash in SK mag. The glitz and dash is part of marketing, whether I like it or not.] -- Dave Kruger Astoria, OR
Surfing vs Kayaking as magazine layouts --- It may have something to do with sun-tanned cutie pies of both genders in swim suits vs. some of us battle axes in layers of sun protective shirts and a figure flattering paddling vest.... Pat Slaven Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 19:19:54 -0500 From: Nick Schade <nick_at_guillemot-kayaks.com> Subject: [Paddlewise] What's Wrong with Kayaking I was just in the local Barnes & Noble looking through the magazine rack. I noticed that there were 4 or 5 slick surfing magazines and no kayaking magazines. While they typically do carry some, I find it amazing that here on the northeast coast where surfing is virtually non existent and sea kayaking is quite popular, that so much more shelf space would be devoted to surfing than kayaking. All these surfing magazines have very attractive covers. One is virtually an art publication. The whole image presented is interesting and exciting. How come sea kayaking is portrayed as boring? Is a picture of a low-end kayak, sitting calmly on smooth water really the image of sea kayaking that attracts us to the sport? Is this really the cover shot that is going to attract people to the sport? It seems to me that the enthusiastic sea kayakers participate in a different sport from what we see on the covers and inside the sea kayaking magazines. Wouldn't it be good for the sport if it was portrayed in the same way that the most enthusiastic experience it? While we are on the subject, who is happy with the new layout of Sea Kayaker Magazine? To me it looks like just another conglomerate produced enthusiast publication. The old layout was distinctive and at least somewhat interesting. Nick Schade Guillemot Kayaks 824 Thompson St Glastonbury, CT 06033 USA Ph/Fx: (860) 659-8847 http://www.guillemot-kayaks.com/ NOTICE: This message has been checked for all known viruses!
I think there's a lot in this comment: "There are the Gravity games for young studs, whether skateboarding, snowboarding, BMX, or surfing. And they certainly don't want to do anything as boring as floating around in a long, tippy kayak, waiting to fall in the icy cold water." There's nothing wrong with surfing, and there's nothing wrong with Sea Kayaking. They appeal to completely different personalities. I used to ride motorcycles-- many of you will understand what I mean when I juxtapose the touring rider on a BMW with the poser on a Harley or the poser on a cafe racer (don't get me wrong, though: not everyone on a cafe racer is a poser). Sea Kayaks are closer to the former (and I'm sure you have also figured out my preference in bikes). Surfing is closer to the latter. Surfing is probably more interesting to 15-25 year-old males for the obvious reason-- elaborating on that will get me in trouble. And I haven't compared the prices of surfboards and sea kayaks, but I'm guessing some of the answer lies there, as well. Rather than attacking the only publication that is our champion, I think we should be looking at the issue raised by another Paddlewiser: "The current level of kayaking publicity causes me to take a tow rope along even on the days when I go on solo paddling trips because of the likelihood of meeting beginners in trouble. I'm horrified when I meet people paddling sit-on-tops on the ocean, holding young children in their laps, without a life vest to be seen. When I see these boats being washed ashore by the surf, with swimmers and children in the water, it makes me wonder how much longer before kayaks are banned at our State beaches. On more than one occasion I've met hostile life guards who are against all kayakers because of the bad experiences cause by the inexperienced... Don't gloss over the fact that there is risk involved in sea kayaking." Sorry to return to motorcycling again, but they wrote the book on this problem! Motorcyclists have, for years, been fighting the problems caused by their ignorant and/or noisy co-enthusiasts. Yet they are still banned from some campsites and, sometimes, regulated more tightly than cars. I'm really happy to have fallen into paddling. It's a great sport. I'm in a sub-group: both of my boats are folding doubles. My subgroup is certainly not going to have enough weight to influence the issues that effect us (lousy airline baggage limit allowances, for instance), but there are advantages to our obscurity, as well. My suggestion for improving our sport's profile is that we band together. We should not be worried about recruiting too many paddlers-- the glory days of paddling were in the 1880s, the 1920s, and the 1990s-- the cycle will repeat again, but maybe no time soon. There are lots of enthusiastic paddlers in the United Kingdom, many in the US, and there is a fanatical folding-kayak contingent in Japan. Folding Kayaks, Recreational kayaks, hardshell sea kayaks, etc.-- we all share many pleasures and, if you step back, our differences are not so dramatic. Efforts to improve paddler education and to encourage proper use of safety gear in the rental environment will go a long way. Happy New Year to everyone, Chris
[Moderator's Note: Content unaltered. Excessive quoting (including headers/footers/sig lines/extraneous text from previous posts, etc.) have been removed. Please edit quoted material in addition to removing header/trailers when replying to posts.] Chris I certainly hope you don't stereotype kayakers based on the style of boats they paddle as simplistically and negatively as you have done with motorcyclists in this post! Would be a real shame -- much like considering folding-boat owners as sissy paddlers because their kayaks aren't made with kevlar or glass and surely not able to handle the thrill of playing in big water! Just my two cents! Jim Tynan Pike Road, AL Avid sea and whitewater kayaker, and Harley "poser" -----Original Message----- From: chris_at_tejirian.com Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] What's Wrong with Kayaking I think there's a lot in this comment: "There are the Gravity games for young studs, whether skateboarding, snowboarding, BMX, or surfing. And they certainly don't want to do anything as boring as floating around in a long, tippy kayak, waiting to fall in the icy cold water." There's nothing wrong with surfing, and there's nothing wrong with Sea Kayaking. They appeal to completely different personalities. I used to ride motorcycles-- many of you will understand what I mean when I juxtapose the touring rider on a BMW with the poser on a Harley or the poser on a cafe racer (don't get me wrong, though: not everyone on a cafe racer is a poser). Sea Kayaks are closer to the former (and I'm sure you have also figured out my preference in bikes). Surfing is closer to the latter. Surfing is probably more interesting to 15-25 year-old males for the obvious reason-- elaborating on that will get me in trouble. And I haven't compared the prices of surfboards and sea kayaks, but I'm guessing some of the answer lies there, as well. <snip> *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Reflecting on Jim's message, I think I fell into exactly the trap that I was warning against when I used the word "poser". I hope everyone can look past that word and find value in the message I was trying to convey. -----Original Message----- Chris I certainly hope you don't stereotype kayakers based on the style of boats they paddle as simplistically and negatively as you have done with motorcyclists in this post!... Jim Tynan Pike Road, AL Avid sea and whitewater kayaker, and Harley "poser"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:33:40 PDT