Previous
Alpinist Magazine to Suspend Operations
by Jay unknown
Jackson, Wyoming — October 16, 2008 — Alpinist LLC, which publishes the climbing magazine Alpinist, runs the website www.alpinist.com and produces The Alpinist Film Festival, announced today that the October 2008 financial crisis has forced them to suspend operations.
Founded in 2002 by Marc Ewing and Christian Beckwith, Alpinist began in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, as an archival-quality publication dedicated to world alpinism and adventure climbing. The quarterly quickly gained a reputation for both superior writing and beautiful photography; by 2004, Italian climbing legend Reinhold Messner called it, "The best climbing magazine in the world today." Alpinist went on to win numerous awards; in March 2005 it was featured in a seven-page article in Outside Magazine ("The Purists") that explored its impact on American climbing.
Alpinist's website, www.alpinist.com, attracted more than 50,000 unique visitors per month. Breaking news, weekly features, video, and desktop wallpaper images were complemented by reader's blogs and gear reviews, creating a site that thousands of climbers turned to daily for both information and entertainment.
In 2004, Beckwith founded The Barry Corbet Film Festival in honor of cinematographer and adventure legend Barry Corbet. In 2005, the event was folded into Alpinist LLC as The Alpinist Film Festival (AFF). By 2008, the AFF, held each winter in Jackson, had grown to a four-day annual event that attracted more than 3,000 people each year. In 2008, the AFF began touring; events in Bend, OR; Bozeman, MT; and Boulder, CO, exported signature elements of the master festival, such as cocktail hours and live DJs, to create a fun gathering for adventure communities across the West.
"We're extremely proud of what we've been able to accomplish in the six and a half years since we started," said Publisher Ewing from his home in Chicago. "There hasn't been a publication like Alpinist since Ascent"—the iconic climbing publication that emerged from the 1960s to inspire a generation of climbers—"and our readers have been our lifeblood. We owe them everything."
"It's incredibly sad to close after working so hard for so many years," said Editor-in-Chief Christian Beckwith. "That being said, I'm deeply proud of our team for putting out twenty-five great issues, the film festival has been a blast, and I'm honored to have shared all this work and creation with our community. I'll always look back on Alpinist with joy."
Exploration of the options for the various Alpinist businesses are underway. Details will be made available on www.alpinist.com when they are finalized.
Tags:
18 Comments
Add a Comment
josephgdawson    2008-10-21 |
I'll miss the editor's tirades about global warming and how it is man made. I found it so crass that he would use a climbing mag to air his political beliefs I quit buying it. Amusing that they blame going out of business on the credit crisis...I wonder how other businesses can keep operating. |
|
michaelj2 2008-10-21 |
What are you a flat earther? It's called science. But if candidates for high office can believe in creationism, I guess you're entitled to your opinion, no matter how ignorant. |
|
m_hurley 2008-10-21 |
Science? "Science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge" or "knowing") is the effort to discover, and increase human understanding of how the physical world works."(1) What are you, Richard Dawkins? Do you think that, since you personally believe that the world is limited to "natural, physical forces," based on your own ability to reason and your own observations, that anyone who believes something else is "ignorant"? Science, as described above, is an "effort", and not an infallible source of truth. Sure, you can appeal to it as a means of validation for your own perception of truth. But it all comes down to presupposition and hypothesis. And "The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands."(2) (1) Wikipedia (2) Psalms 19:1 P.S. I'm glad you recognize that folks are entitled to their opinions. And you thought HE was ignorant.... |
|
landongw 2008-10-22 |
well, i guess he did start the mag, and since it's HIS mag he can probably write what he wants. And global warming is not exactly a political belief, it's a very sound scientific theory, that 98% of the world now supports. "Freedom Fries" are political. If you've ever looked at a picture of the mountains from 60 years ago you'll see that global warming is profoundly impacting the alpine environment. Seems pretty relevant to the subject matter of Alpinism to me. |
|
michaelj2 2008-10-22 |
Hurley, Sounds like you had to look up the definition of science to see what it means. Next step might be reading what scientists actually have to say about global warming. The number who dispute that its causes are anthropogenic (back to Webster for you) are on par with those who think the moon landings were faked. Believe anything you want, but there is a solid consensus among those who study global warming as to its causes. |
|
Johnny_Fang 2008-10-22 |
i'll miss the alpinist, it was by far the best-written and best-photographed work for those of us that enjoy this pastime. as for the bickering above, saying the alpinist shouldn't write about global warming is like saying Wine Enthusiast shouldn't write about the cause of cork shortages, Beer Advocate shouldn't write about the cause of hop shortages, Dog Fancy shouldn't write about heartworm, Nature shouldn't write about evolution, or The Onion shouldn't write about annoying religious relatives: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/38622 |
|
m_hurley 2008-10-22 |
Michael, The only reason I went to Wikipedia for a definition is for standardization purposes, as I knew that definition was one generally agreed upon by those with whom I've discussed such matters. And I have read what scientists have said about global warming. It sounds like you admit there are "scientists" who dispute global warming? If so, you are much more permissive than many I've debated with, who would contend that anyone who doesn't adhere to what they perceive to be "the consensus" is, by default, not a part of "the scientific community". But the fact is, people will believe what they want to believe, and the "consensus" about global warming to which you refer may simply be a product of the spirit of the age (reflected and magnified, of course, by the media). 100 years from now, scientists may be laughing at they hype over global warming we now see. The amount of ozone in the ozone layer fluctuates naturally by about 50%. That's ten times the amount of the total damage caused by chlorofluorocarbons. But, to hear it from most people, they'd say there's SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE that it's going to kill us all. Consider that, in the past, people have seriously thought we were entering another ice age. Clearly, weather patterns, viewed in such small segments as a human lifespan, can be misleading. And, of course, coming from a Christian perspective, as I do, I come to these conclusions more readily. Biased? You bet. The only way science progresses is through bias and imagination. Johnny, I hope you don't really view our dialogue as "bickering". That's pretty low. As far as the magazine goes, some people may appreciate certain style and content where others don't. |
|
Johnny_Fang 2008-10-22 |
There are no accepted members of the scientific community that dispute the existence of the phenomenon we know of as global climate change. None. Zero. Zilch. Period. There are very, very, very, very few members of the scientific community that believe that humans have had no causal relationship with global climate change. Very, very few, and their work is generally not respected by the scientific community. There is, however, plenty of disagreement about the STRENGTH of the causal relationship between humans and global climate change. There are other possible causes, of course. And that I can respect. The scientific community is by no means at a consensus that humans are even the primary cause of the change, although there is very good evidence that we are. I will say, though, that anyone who believes that a talking snake tricked our ancestors into a eating an apple and therefore engaging in a lifetime of "sin," or that believes that there are many "abominations" worthy of execution (including eating kites, talking back to one's parents, or shaving off one's beard), generally loses all credibility in any debate. |
|
veilneb 2008-10-22 |
We also haven't been overfishing our seas....or poluting our waters. And the rain forest is the same size as it was 500 years ago! Go CHURCH OF THE SPHAGETTI MONSTER! Hurley, you are a Jackass! |
|
m_hurley 2008-10-22 |
Johnny, Thank you for your insight. I believe I am in agreement with you to a certain extent. However, as far as the extended effects of and the relationship between humans and the climate change (if indeed it can be called that), I may, as you said, differ. And I am well aware that such persons as myself (although you seem to have a rather flawed view of my position...nothing new there) open themselves to ridicule by participating in discussions of a scientific nature. The biblical presupposition has been frantically buried in a contrived pile of scientific reasoning. <sarcasm>We may not know everything about the world, but we must not admit the possibility that it could have come about through the biblical sequence of events. Such a story offends and constricts our great minds and expansive moral and societal pretentions!!!</sarcasm> veilnab, "Contempt is a well-recognized defensive reaction." - I.A. Richard I think that says it all. =p |
|
vertical_planar 2008-10-23 |
m_hurley science is indeed just an attempt to describe the world. Like any attempt it gains or looses credibility by the successful correlation of its assumption with observation. As far as I am aware, scientific predictions are overwhelmingly more often verified compared to those of any other system of belief. I don’t think anyone denies your right to believe whatever you like. Its just that by embracing a certain approach you have better chances to describe the world in a way that it can be verified by observation. For what that matters anyway… And since my syntax is crap and the above probably makes no sense… wtf all this has to do with alpinist??? |
|
napoleon_in_rags 2008-10-23 |
"Amusing that they blame going out of business on the credit crisis...I wonder how other businesses can keep operating." Maybe you believe the current credit crisis, like the global warming crisis, is a myth propagated by the liberal media? Many small business's who rely on seasonal sales (like a magazine) are having trouble getting short term loans to run their companies in the off season. I doubt the Alpinist will be the last climbing related company to buckle under. Personally I will miss the quality of the photographs. They were far superior to the other US climbing Mags. |
|
m_hurley 2008-10-23 |
vertical planar, I like your train of thought. And this really doesn't have much to do with the article. I apologize. But it does have to do with climbing, as your purpose and attitude in climbing depends on your view and understanding of the world, no? Do you think there's any chance of the mag coming back later? |
|
tongueinbarbie 2008-10-24 |
Does not stop them from sending me a renewal form in the mail Wednesday. |
|
m_hurley 2008-10-26 |
Another quick note for you, vertical planar. Are you aware that many of the most revealing and breakthrough scientific discoveries and theories have been effected by scientists (yes, they were scientists) who held the Christian worldview as their starting point, or base assumption? It is only in recent years that the view has come to be regarded as a hindrance to further discovery in the field of science. So, I don't see that there should be any discredit to the Christian hypothesis. And I don't agree that the "attempt to describe the world" should NECESSARILY be separated from it. I am not saying it may not be attempted APART from it, just that it may be attempted THROUGH without a necessary compromise of validity. Unfortunately, this is the sort of impertinent presupposition and restriction on which the "scientific consensus" seems to have set their camp. Really, when it comes down to it, intelligent design could be just as valid a hypothesis for the ORIGIN of life as any other prominent atheists have to offer. Other, more intelligent life forms that themselves originated through strictly evolutionary means? Molecules piggybacking crystals? Seriously, intelligent design doesn't necessarily rule out the evolution of the species (even though my personal views do), but JUST their origin. But still it is anathema! Anyways, nice talking with you... |
|
andrewbanandrew 2008-10-26 |
stop shitting up these comments and go start your own thread as for the magazine, well I'll miss it. maybe they'll put their archives on clearance... |
|
m_hurley 2008-10-27 |
Sorry. |
|
dudemanbu 2008-11-04 |
To quote the great noodly being in the sky, the lord and creator off all, the flying spaghetti monster- "I'd really rather you didn't act like a sanctimonious holier-than-thou ass when describing my noodly goodness. If some people don't believe in me, that's okay. Really, I'm not that vain. Besides, this isn't about them so don't change the subject." rAmen! I will really miss the Alpinist. It was by far the best climbing mag available. For those doubting how it's related to the credit crisis, I offer you these facts: Magazines and other periodicals make the majority of their cash on advertisements. In the past 6 months, ad revenue has fallen significantly because it's just not justifiable to spend money on ads when you're barely able to borrow enough money to make your weekly payroll. I just hope that this isn't the only casualty of the totally blown economy. |
