Are 'WW2/1940s' events the only pull that heritage railways have to get bums on seats these days?

[TJ52]

Nostalgia ain't what it used to be.

 

Hasn't there been some drift here? The original question was whether WW2 events was the only way preserved railways could attract more people.  It's turned into a critique of such events. 

 

I've taught both world wars, the Holocaust and Vietnam. I don't expect a railway event to be particularly educational.  It's about enjoyment. 

 

When I was interviewed for my first teaching job in 1975 I was asked why I thought the British were so preoccupied with WW2. I said that perhaps it was the last time we were truly some sort of world power and actually made a difference. That people could be proud that they prevailed.

 

Possibly. It's not been great since has it?

 

Terry

[009 micro modeller]

10 minutes ago, TJ52 said:

I don't expect a railway event to be particularly educational.

Why? Some railways are Accredited Museums. Surely if you’ve previously taught history you’re aware of museum education as a concept?

 

10 minutes ago, TJ52 said:

When I was interviewed for my first teaching job in 1975 I was asked why I thought the British were so preoccupied with WW2. I said that perhaps it was the last time we were truly some sort of world power and actually made a difference.

Agreed, and as alluded to by others earlier perhaps also because fighting against Nazi Germany seems to have been (at least with hindsight, knowing how evil it was) pretty uncontroversially the right thing to do. Most major historical conflicts are not as clear-cut (or at least they don’t appear to be). And even if you think it’s a bit more complex than the bit I’ve put in bold that’s the general perception that a lot of people have, which perhaps is the important thing in this context.

 

10 minutes ago, TJ52 said:

Hasn't there been some drift here? The original question was whether WW2 events was the only way preserved railways could attract more people.  It's turned into a critique of such events. 

There has been some drift but as I suggested earlier, possibly because the answer to the original question is fairly obviously ‘no’, given the various other events that many railways run, and also because the premise (implied in the question) that the railways concerned are doing these events solely as money spinners and not for any other reason is perhaps a bit flawed.

 

2 hours ago, whart57 said:

If you're talking about nostalgia then perhaps make clear - to yourself if to no-one else - what you are nostalgic about. I can't imagine anyone is nostalgic about outside privies or ice on the inside of the windows of unheated bedrooms. Or the all-pervading damp in winter. Some may be nostalgic for drinking and eating is a fog of tobacco smoke but I'm not, or for the rasping sore throat the next morning even though you are a non-smoker.

Isn’t that sort of the point though - that nostalgia is a bit (too) selective in remembering the good bits of the past and not the less positive stuff? That’s the problem with having an excessively nostalgia-fuelled narrative in a space where people might expect or want to see a more objective historical one (especially when, as in some of the WW2 events described in this thread, some people are ‘nostalgic’ for something they didn’t actually experience, though they might have seen a lot of fictionalised portrayals made a little later on).

[lmsforever]

This thread is an interesting one to read,the general view seems to be not in favour of military events you are welcome to be anti but remember we are able to have these thoughts because our ancestors fought to allow us freedom.Okay some of these enactors are not good but the majority are very carefully planned and researched  I watch them carefully and have long chats with the people who are involved in a group. I have a great interest in military matters and read many books about past military matters I do not discuss my hobby unless the matter arises in conversation. But I do  think that we should learn about our military history and how it happened and how it enabled us to be like we are now  and also make many people change thier views. Running a preserved railway is a very difficult thing to do and you need a couple of big events that are going to attract people who have never visited before, your base audience  will always turn up. Military events are always exciting  and can raise much needed  finance  so dont knock them please  why not find out about the history being depicted take an interest you might be surprised.

[Morello Cherry]

I will try to tread carefully here.

 

I think that the expansion and ubiquity of War on the Line and the War Cult need to be seen in some kind of context and as part of a bigger picture.

 

There has been the instrumentalisation of the memory of WW2 for political purposes over the last 20+ years. And I would suggest that it is part of a bigger process. I would suggest that the critical juncture or starting point is 9/11 in 2001.

 

In the 1980s and 1990s 11th Nov was barely a thing. Kids at my school would tipex the poppies white (if memory serves me correctly this was an anti-war gesture).  I can remember in the 1990s the land lady of the pub I used to drink at literally racing downstairs to throw two squaddies out of the pub before they had even ordered a drink. 'We don't serve squaddies here, you aren't welcome, go.' This anti-squaddie attitude was certainly not unusual in my experience. Post 9/11 and with the deification of the military and the fetishisation of the military, there is absolutely no way she would be able to get away with that without it ending up a tabloid scandal.

 

There is a constant search for a usable history, WW2 provides that. It is, because of the nature of the holocaust, perhaps the only unimpeachable, morally justifiable war of the C20. It can be used in a way in which WW1, Korea, Suez, Vietnam, the Cold War, or the Falklands can't.

 

Britain is not unusual in this, I was in North America quite often during this period and I can remember how things like baseball games became a virtual military tattoo. Think Bush in his flying suit, the forced playing of the national anthem before games. Friends from Russia at the time noted how Putin really ramped up the Soviet/Russian war cult (something that had really dropped off after 1992) around the time of the Second Chechen War. (We see those narratives being produced as justification for the invasion of Ukraine).

 

In the UK War on the line pre-existed before this so it is easy to ramp up, it doesn't seem unusual. The public buys into it due to the constant re-enforcement in the media of WW2 as a heroic period (which people can understand) and worth memorialising, and so people who wouldn't normally go to railways go, it puts bums on seats and more lines see that it is a money spinner so follow suit.

 

The second critical moment is the economic crisis since 2009 (or depending on where you live 1979 or 1973) and subsequent austerity and neglect. Again, WW2 and the narrative of sacrifice for a higher purpose comes to the fore and the whole 1940s asthetic 'keep calm and carry on' etc, in other words by reminding people of the austerity of WW2 for a higher purpose it is in effect to tell people to shut up about austerity and be like your beloved granny/grandad who didn't complain but who sucked it up and got on with it. Even yesterday I read an article (from 2016) which attributed the success of the Tal-y-llyn pioneers to 'their well of initiative gained over the “Make do and Mend” war years'. To which my reaction was 'ffs'. The pioneers of the movement like Tom Rolt, John Bate, Allan Garraway  etc were extremely well trained engineers and that was what enabled them to do the things they did, very little or nothing to do with make do and mend. But I include this here to show how people irrelevently invoke WW2 as a way of explaining things.

 

There is a very clear nationalist turn both soft and hard after 2001 and again after 2009 - afterall, how many programmes can you remember in the 1990s that had the word 'Great British....' in the title, vs now where it is Great British Bake Off/Sewing/Menu/Rail Journey, etc etc (all with the same nostalgic asthetic). Look at how almost every single Portillo programme seems to invoke either C19 'when Britain led the world in' or WW2 'as Britain stood alone against Nazism'. And of course the hard nationalism that logically follows on from that.

 

It isn't orchestrated in the way some tinfoil hatter on youtube might think but rather those with the ability to pick and choose what takes place go with what they think will sell and that again re-enforces certain themes. Why put on something that won't sell?

 

Let me give you an example - mid 2010s, I was involved in an open pitch/audition for programmes for the BBC, it was big thing, there were maybe about 30-40 programmes being pitched. The producers and higher ups were there, they were all white, privately educated, Oxbridge. There was a whole range of stuff being pitched, I remember one person who did a brilliant pitch for a programme about Iran. They were not selected. The pitches selected were essentially all 'Britain, Britain, Britain', nostalgic and very much in with this vibe and those selected were white, privately educated, Oxbridge. There were some exceptions, there was one guy from India who was working on Indian and Pakistani cinema did a really interesting pitch looking at the way in which film influences memory of partion. (To explain - person is asked to tell about their experience of partion, they do so but the story they tell maps exactly onto scenes from a popular film, we can't say that the person is lying but it is strange, so what is happening and what is the relationship between what people see and what they think happened to them). Absolutely brilliant, so I was delighted when I'd heard he had been picked. When I saw the programme all of his original pitch had been cut out and it was basically about Britain and partion. It had basically become more of the same narrative.

 

The producers were choosing what they felt comfortable with, what they thought their audience would know and would like and that would bring in ratings. Just like railway managers go with what they know, what fits with a historical narrative they know, and what they think will bring in money. Why take a risk in doing something different. But this is how something becomes so dominant and so pervasive and so hard to escape.

 

12 hours ago, 009 micro modeller said:

Possibly because the key era for them to recreate is often the 1930s and earlier (when they were still open and carrying passengers), and in some cases they have more access to Victorian/Edwardian rolling stock and only had a relatively minor part in WW2 history.

 

 

Two things - most standard gauge lines will be using their MK1s etc and BR standard etc on war on the line. So many/most don't have access to appropriate rolling stock for the 1940s. I mean for example the WSR is pretty much all MK1s. Off the top of my head maybe only the Bluebell and SVR could run a timetable without MK1s.

 

You are right that the narrow gauge lines have more pre-1939, so why don't they go for more WW1 themed events? Take the FfR for example - enough vintage rolling stock to run a gala, 2 WW1 diesels, an Alco (last time I saw it it was in WD livery), a Baldwin, Boston Lodge was involved in munitions work. I apologise if I've missed their WW1 themed galas (I was out of the UK during alot of the WW1 centenary commemorations so missed a lot there).

 

But if you are a line recreating BR era line, why not go for Suez - other than the fact that no one, outside of a few historians, has heard of it because it was an embarassing humiliation of a fading imperial power, oh wait... :)

 

TLDR: As politics and hence society over the last 25 years has become more nationalistic, war on the line events fit into that nationalist turn, people feel more nationalist so go to the events, so railways run more such events because they make money and they become ubiquitous, their ubiquity re-enforces the nationalism that permates contemporary life.

Edited July 26 by Morello Cherry

[jjb1970]

12 hours ago, 009 micro modeller said:

Surely the point though is that it’s a bit irresponsible in situations where the organisation concerned is perceived to fill an educational role, or even more so when heritage education is a stated part of its charitable objectives (even if not explicitly linked to that particular event)?

 

That's a fair point, though equally so for most special events. When our kids were young we enjoyed the Thomas days at Quainton, it wasn't my thing but the kids loved it. I guess the education argument is similar to all 'edutainment' type concepts - for most it is just entertainment but a few will be inspired to learn more. 

[jjb1970]

I do think there are lot's of potential WW2 and wartime railway exhibitions which I would like to see, primarily the role of railways in war. Even many rail enthusiasts don't appreciate the significance of railways in war, in the 19th century railways transformed mobilisation timetables (critical in military planning) and strategic railway construction was a major part of network evolution in many countries. 

 

Perhaps the best example of showing the role of railways in events of WW2 is the IWM Holocaust Gallery and the huge diorama of a train and new victims arriving at Auschwitz. Very powerful and profoundly moving.

 

I would be very interested in exhibitions of the history of railways and war, but not limited to WW2 and not a nostalgia trip, reenactment etc.

[Hal Nail]

8 hours ago, TJ52 said:

Hasn't there been some drift here?

It rather demonstrates why click bait headlines exist.

[jjb1970]

7 hours ago, Morello Cherry said:

I will try to tread carefully here.

 

Let me give you an example - mid 2010s, I was involved in an open pitch/audition for programmes for the BBC, it was big thing, there were maybe about 30-40 programmes being pitched. The producers and higher ups were there, they were all white, privately educated, Oxbridge. There was a whole range of stuff being pitched, I remember one person who did a brilliant pitch for a programme about Iran. They were not selected. The pitches selected were essentially all 'Britain, Britain, Britain', nostalgic and very much in with this vibe and those selected were white, privately educated, Oxbridge. There were some exceptions, there was one guy from India who was working on Indian and Pakistani cinema did a really interesting pitch looking at the way in which film influences memory of partion. (To explain - person is asked to tell about their experience of partion, they do so but the story they tell maps exactly onto scenes from a popular film, we can't say that the person is lying but it is strange, so what is happening and what is the relationship between what people see and what they think happened to them). Absolutely brilliant, so I was delighted when I'd heard he had been picked. When I saw the programme all of his original pitch had been cut out and it was basically about Britain and partion. It had basically become more of the same narrative.

 

The producers were choosing what they felt comfortable with, what they thought their audience would know and would like and that would bring in ratings. Just like railway managers go with what they know, what fits with a historical narrative they know, and what they think will bring in money. Why take a risk in doing something different. But this is how something becomes so dominant and so pervasive and so hard to escape.

 

 

 

 

Most people in most countries are interested in their local environment and the world they know. There may be a fine line between what we might call 'nationalism' (or patriotism if people prefer) and people just being more interested in the world they see around them than stuff far away, but it's a critical one. Most news is parochial, even foreign news is generally reported in terms of how it might impact our country, again I really don't see that as stemming from nationalist tendencies or negative views towards the rest of the world but from recognition that people are interested in their own locale. Adam Smith got it right with his famous quote about China and losing a little finger finger. That's pretty much a universal characteristic of everywhere I've visited.

[Neil]

8 hours ago, lmsforever said:

..... remember we are able to have these thoughts because our ancestors fought to allow us freedom.......

 

I think it's instructive to look a bit more closely at what happens after conflict. There is a strong argument to be made that a German citizen today is more free than their UK counterpart in that they can live, work and study, visa free, in a greater spread of countries than we can. Russians, on the winning side in WWII were, and still are, far less 'free' than we are. Conflict in Ukraine and Gaza has been instigated to oppress and curtail freedoms. 

[Nearholmer]

7 hours ago, Morello Cherry said:

work. I apologise if I've missed their WW1 themed galas (I was out of the UK during alot of the WW1 centenary commemorations so missed a lot there).

Apedale did a series of absolutely excellent “Tracks to the Trenches” events over the WW1 commemoration period, showcasing the various WDLR trains, plus period military vehicles, encampments etc.

 

There seems to be a contrast between WW1 themed events, and WW2 though, in that the former are always on a “lest we forget” basis, a sort of deeply regretful memorialisation of wasted lives, while the latter sometimes teeter on the brink of the jingoism and WW2-cultism that several of us here keep expressing concern about.

[Hal Nail]

35 minutes ago, jjb1970 said:

again I really don't see that as stemming from nationalist tendencies or negative views towards the rest of the world but from recognition that people are interested in their own locale. 

I've had a theory for some time that most people simply want to feel like they are winning and an easy way to feel better about themselves is by putting down the tribe next door - be it man utd, political parties, the rich/poor, Europeans and especially other foreigners.

 

However i am well aware it's very easy for confirmation bias to affect this sort of thinking!

[spamcan61]

47 minutes ago, Hal Nail said:

I've had a theory for some time that most people simply want to feel like they are winning and an easy way to feel better about themselves is by putting down the tribe next door - be it man utd, political parties, the rich/poor, Europeans and especially other foreigners.

 

However i am well aware it's very easy for confirmation bias to affect this sort of thinking!

I think you're spot on with that observation, and unfortunately we have a fair few people with aspirations to power who are really good at exploiting it.

Edited July 26 by spamcan61

[jjb1970]

It's amazing how constant many emotions and attitudes are. The underlying concepts don't really change, all that changes are boundaries and names.

[009 micro modeller]

7 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

 

That's a fair point, though equally so for most special events. When our kids were young we enjoyed the Thomas days at Quainton, it wasn't my thing but the kids loved it. I guess the education argument is similar to all 'edutainment' type concepts - for most it is just entertainment but a few will be inspired to learn more. 

Not sure it’s comparable. Can a family-friendly event based around a fictional character really be ‘irresponsible’ in the way I meant in the quoted post?

[jjb1970]

5 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:

Not sure it’s comparable. Can a family-friendly event based around a fictional character really be ‘irresponsible’ in the way I meant in the quoted post?

 

I think it is all perspective.  I don't like WW2 reenactment stuff, but many others see it as harmless entertainment with some educational value. If you look at Thomas books it could be argued that some of the social attitude underpinning it all and construction of an idyllic past of traditional values is also rather problematic if subjecting it to real analysis.

 

[009 micro modeller]

11 minutes ago, jjb1970 said:

 

I think it is all perspective.  I don't like WW2 reenactment stuff, but many others see it as harmless entertainment with some educational value. If you look at Thomas books it could be argued that some of the social attitude underpinning it all and construction of an idyllic past of traditional values is also rather problematic if subjecting it to real analysis.

 

I don’t think that comes across in the way it’s presented at the events the railways run though, especially for the target audience. Interesting that people have mentioned Victorian-themed events - that’s an era that logically is much more tied to empire nostalgia etc. and is what is often called ‘contested history’ in a way that WW2 generally isn’t - yet that doesn’t seem to come across so much in the way that museums and heritage railways present Victorian events.

Edited July 26 by 009 micro modeller

[whart57]

10 hours ago, lmsforever said:

This thread is an interesting one to read,the general view seems to be not in favour of military events you are welcome to be anti but remember we are able to have these thoughts because our ancestors fought to allow us freedom.

 

I do  think that we should learn about our military history and how it happened and how it enabled us to be like we are now  and also make many people change their views.

 

You are aware I hope that Vladimir Putin is using those same arguments to justify his war against Ukraine to the Russian people.

 

I quite agree that we should learn about military history, but not the selective military history we are constantly fed. We've covered some of that here, there is a quite justifiable censorship of the harsher aspects of war at events that are really meant to be a nice day out. However military historians are all too frequently prone to writing partisan accounts, and politicians and others are quite happy to present a country's military history as a highlights show.

 

It's when that spills over into politics that it gets dangerous. I've mentioned Putin, but we also have the tragedy of Gaza where an inability of Israelis and Palestinians to see that they have a shared history drives the brutality. One of the emotional drivers behind the Brexit argument was the myth of Britain standing alone against Hitler and Napoleon. A myth some are very happy to lap up.

 

If we did really learn about Britain's military history we would learn that even after Dunkirk, Britain still had the Empire on its side - including one very large Indian army - the navies and merchant navies of the likes of Norway and the Netherlands were still in the war on the Allied side, and de Gaulle was working on getting France's not inconsiderable colonial forces under Free French control.

 

If we did really learn about military history we would learn that, actually, Britain played a minor role in defeating Napoleon. The Germans were the ones who did, first at the battle of Leipzig and then the coup de grace at Waterloo. And we might learn of the disaster that was the Walcheren Expedition. A lesson in incompetence at the top.

 

We might also learn that to the British government in 1914, "gallant little Belgium" was a fortuitous twist that turned the general opposition to joining the war in Europe that existed in late July into a swing behind Britain's entry as a consequence of treaty commitments secretly made. Given how we've been played ourselves over Iraq it might have been good to have had a more cynical view of military history.

[Nearholmer]

29 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:

yet that doesn’t seem to come across so much in the way that museums and heritage railways present Victorian events.

Interesting that, and I wonder whether it’s because nearly all of the actions that the British Army and Navy were engaged in during Victorian times were in some far flung corner of a foreign field (well, not a field in the case of the navy, clearly), although men in uniform, parades, town garrisons, and jingoism ( the term was coined at the height of Empire, after all) were very much a part of late Victorian Britain, and there must have been a lot of former military men, some visibly disabled, about. We also seem clearer-sighted about the domestic unpleasantries of late Victorian Britain, the poverty, exploitation within Britain, as opposed to by Britain overseas, etc. Maybe the issue with 1940s is that it’s just too recent to allow even a semi-detached perspective.