Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

16 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

I won't get involved in a discussion about slavery and its place in history but I will happily get involved in congratulating Tony and Mo, as well as the rest of the family, on their new arrivals. I also became a grandad recently and it is wonderful!

 

Best wishes,

 

Tony G

And our congratulations to you, Tony.

 

Grandson or granddaughter?

 

Best regards,

 

Tony. 

[John Tomlinson]

2 hours ago, queensquare said:

 

I particularly object to the use of the term 'woke' as a form of insult or put down.

 

History is the study of what happened in the past. The past can not be changed, its gone, its happened, its an objective fact. But the study of what happened, why it happened and the consequences of it happening is very much of the present and, by its very nature, is subjective and is quite rightly constantly being re-evaluated and re-interpreted as we, as a society evolve. History, our interpretation of the past, is therefore constantly changing. It has to. If it didnt we would still believe the earth was flat.

 

Jerry, former lecturer in modern history 

 

We no longer believe the earth is flat because of scientific inquiry and research, plus our science has taken man into space and humans have seen the earth to be a sphere, not a plate! It isn't an "interpretation" of anything. 

 

History can be amended as more facts emerge with research (you obviously know this), but I'd describe that as a correction of past error more than anything. An example being access to Soviet archives by western researchers after the end of the Cold War. As far as interpretation goes, that's a more nuanced area. You say this happens "as we, as a society evolve", which I don't dispute. But surely that implies some ethical and political judgements, which will not be universally shared and agreed upon?

 

So your or my interpretation of something might differ from someone else's. I don't for example, and coming back to where this started, hold the view that the U.K. as a country has a financial liability for slavery, one reason being that much of human history has involved people behaving badly towards each other, so why single out this example? Slavery was at its peak at the same time as the Hanoverian monarchy was slaughtering Highland Scots at Culloden, and I'd doubt if the latter in 2024 expect compensation from the government of Lower Saxony. 

 

I'm not sure why "woke" entered into your comment, as I can't see any reference to the word in the thread, recently anyway if at all. If I've missed something then happy to be corrected. As indeed I'm happy to delete this comment if it causes anyone offence, it is a model railway forum after all!

 

John.

Edited 5 hours ago by John Tomlinson
typos

[queensquare]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Jerry,

 

I'll not labour the point (I have two A1s to complete), but isn't trying to change (or correct) history what some of the more 'radicals' are claiming today? Apparently, one of the bunch who chucked that statue into the Avon at Bristol, stated - 'There, we've corrected history'. Some might regard that as current 'woke'. 

 

My original point (perhaps poorly made) was with regard to the naming of locomotives. Take the Lord Nelsons, for instance. Didn't (with the correct apostrophe) they 'celebrate' great British 'heroes' from the past, through their various names? Such would be impossible today because of perceived links to slavery, piracy, of being brigands and warmongers. Yet (contentious here?) it's (correct apostrophe) because of such men (though not wholly) that we live in a free society (at least for the time being). Or, am I being simplistic? 

 

I concede your much greater expertise on the matter (I read the likes of The Eagle and Wizard as a boy, so I'm probably influenced in the wrong manner), and this thread is about modelling after all, but thanks again for your comments. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony, former (among other things) teacher of English. 

 

And, as a grandfather myself now, regards to Ted. 

Thanks Tony.
My comments were not about slavery, the appropriateness or otherwise of loco names or anything else specifically. It was the notion that history is static and that any sort of reinterpretation (which has been happening for millennia) is somehow ‘woke’, whatever that means. Anyone who thinks that a fixed interpretation of the past constitutes history doesn’t really understand it. 

I Know you were an English teacher so many thanks for not picking me up on my many errors - my English leaves a lot to be desired at times!

 

Can I add my congratulations on becoming a grandad. Ted and Archie are both doing really well and we are expecting another grandchild in January.
To lighten the discussion I have attached a picture of our other new arrivals.

 

Jerry

 

 

[queensquare]

9 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

…. with the 'rewriting' of history to suit the 'woke' agenda? …….

3 hours ago, APOLLO said:

I abhor this wokeism we have today. 

 

Brit15

 

1 hour ago, John Tomlinson said:

I'm not sure why "woke" entered into your comment, as I can't see any reference to the word in the thread…..

 

John.

 

Probably my last post on the thread.

 

Jerry

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, queensquare said:

Thanks Tony.
My comments were not about slavery, the appropriateness or otherwise of loco names or anything else specifically. It was the notion that history is static and that any sort of reinterpretation (which has been happening for millennia) is somehow ‘woke’, whatever that means. Anyone who thinks that a fixed interpretation of the past constitutes history doesn’t really understand it. 

I Know you were an English teacher so many thanks for not picking me up on my many errors - my English leaves a lot to be desired at times!

 

Can I add my congratulations on becoming a grandad. Ted and Archie are both doing really well and we are expecting another grandchild in January.
To lighten the discussion I have attached a picture of our other new arrivals.

 

Jerry

 

 

Thanks Jerry,

 

My apologies for forgetting Archie (what terrific names). 

 

All the best to you and Kim for January (and the proud soon-to-be parents).

 

What a lovely picture of your dog and her pups (five is it?). Are you going to keep any?  

 

Oh, I read the Hotspur as a boy, too. I emphasise 'read' because there were very few pictures in it or its contemporaries (though The Eagle had plenty, many in the form of cut-away diagrams by L. Ashwell Wood). 

 

There were tales of derring-do, of courage, of exploration, warfare, yes, even colonisation and colonialism (there was once a tale about Cecil Rhodes, on a train - now maligned, but he set up free scholarships - at Oxford, I think - for students from poorer families, world-wide. I believe they still continue). 

 

Maybe I should have read 'rounder' periodicals in my youth. That way I'd be less reactionary, perhaps. 

 

Kindest regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited 3 hours ago by Tony Wright
to add something

[Chas Levin]

Just adding congratulations to you and Mo, Tony, on becoming grandparents.

 

As others have said, welcoming two new children into the world (the A1s you're building, of course!) is a wonderful thing 👏

[APOLLO]

1 hour ago, queensquare said:

Thanks Tony.
My comments were not about slavery, the appropriateness or otherwise of loco names or anything else specifically. It was the notion that history is static and that any sort of reinterpretation (which has been happening for millennia) is somehow ‘woke’, whatever that means. Anyone who thinks that a fixed interpretation of the past constitutes history doesn’t really understand it. 

I Know you were an English teacher so many thanks for not picking me up on my many errors - my English leaves a lot to be desired at times!

 

Can I add my congratulations on becoming a grandad. Ted and Archie are both doing really well and we are expecting another grandchild in January.
To lighten the discussion I have attached a picture of our other new arrivals.

 

Jerry

 

 

 

A proud Mum. Happiest photo I have seen this troubled week.

 

Brit15

[Clive Mortimore]

3 hours ago, APOLLO said:

Controversial loco names today ?

 

Well perhaps the magnificent Britannia and Battle of Britain classes.

 

Our history and saviours in two superb locomotive classes.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_BR_'Britannia'_Class_locomotives

 

https://bbm.org.uk/battle-britain-class-locomotives/

 

I also agree re the LMS Jubilees - some wonderful names.

 

I abhor this wokeism we have today. 

 

Brit15

Ah Britannia class names!!

 

I have two Brits, one is still destined to be number 47, I was born in a house numbered 47 and that had no name as well. Many of my named locos have some connection to me or my family, not all but many, so a choice might be Clive of India, after all it was Robert Clive that made the name Clive a popular forename, sadly. You trying to be the only Clive in a school "Clive done it Sir". I wish I was John or Dave, how many of them were there in the school?

No the other one is John Bunyan, coming from Bedford half the town is Bunyan this Bunyan that...when in reality he was a rebel priest and at the time imprisoned not celebrated. I song I use to hate with a vengeance was "He who would valiant be", every Monday morning it was the first hymn in assembly. Then the other year I found out we were singing a revised version of the song by Percy Dearmer. John Bunyan's version is a bit more rebellious, even the opening line "Who would true valour see, Let him come hither" has more punch. Like John Bunyan I am proud to be a Bedford rascal.

 

An interesting thing, in Bedford there are two statues that today would be considered WOKE, one is of that naughty priest I have already mentioned the other is John Howard, the prison reformer, Bedford was celebrating wokieness before it was fashionable.

 

 

[gr.king]

In view of what I appear to have missed today...

I deplore the current politically driven mis-education of the younger generation that leads them to believe that Britain's past is full of little but blunders and shame. I am a true patriot, proud of this nation's traditions and its many past achievements, and disgusted by the deliberate abandonment or destruction in recent decades of long-accepted standards of acceptable behaviour.

[robertcwp]

Just imagine the reaction if a present-day loco or unit were to carry the name 'Pretty Polly' (60061), 'Call Boy' (60099) or 'Gay Crusader' (60108). Or even have three consecutive class members carrying, in order, the names 'Dick Turpin' (60080), 'Shotover' (60081), 'Neil Gow' (60082).  I believe all except 60080 were named after thoroughbred racehorses of some note in their day. 

 

A while back, whilst on a visit to Retford, Sandra asked me whether I could think of a BR, Big Four or Pre-Grouping loco that had carried the name (or title) of a woman other than Royalty, nobility or fiction. I could not think of any.  There were of course Pullman Cars with female names.

 

Then there is what might today be seen as gender stereotyping in the names used by Rev W Awdry in his stories. Think of the characters of Daisy and Mavis for example and that all of 1 to 10 carried male names.

 

Even amongst the racehorse Deltics, only one was a filly (Meld).

[Compound2632]

10 minutes ago, robertcwp said:

A while back, whilst on a visit to Retford, Sandra asked me whether I could think of a BR, Big Four or Pre-Grouping loco that had carried the name (or title) of a woman other than Royalty, nobility or fiction. I could not think of any. 

 

Some LNWR examples:

• Sister Dora - Dorothy Pattison, hero of a smallpox epidemic in Walsall.
• Mabel - George Stephenson's mother.
• Madge - John Ramsbottom's wife.
• Eleanor - Richard moon's wife, also one of his daughters.
• Edith - another of Richard Moon's daughters.
• Edith Cavell - executed as a spy by the German military authorities in 1915.

Edited 2 hours ago by Compound2632

[Compound2632]

As you may have concluded, after the first three that I remembered off the top of my head, I've started going through J. Goodman, L&NWR Locomotive Names (RCTS, 2002)...

• Isabella - one of Richard Moon's many sisters, though the only one to be honoured in this way
• Nightingale - Florence, the statistician, rather than the bird.
• Adelaide, Constance, and Henrietta, three Samsons of January 1866. Constance is thought to have been nobility - daughter of the Earl of Clarendon, wife of the Earl of Derby, but the other two have not been traced. Possibly directors' wives or daughters.

[ScRSG]

9 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

The one with the Fowler tender will become 45728 Defiance.

This one taken at St. Rollox, obviously after withdrawl but still with a Fowler tender.

 

Chas

 

[TJ52]

Take a look at the first batch of the King Arthur class. 

 

Terry

[Clive Mortimore]

1 hour ago, gr.king said:

In view of what I appear to have missed today...

I deplore the current politically driven mis-education of the younger generation that leads them to believe that Britain's past is full of little but blunders and shame. I am a true patriot, proud of this nation's traditions and its many past achievements, and disgusted by the deliberate abandonment or destruction in recent decades of long-accepted standards of acceptable behaviour.

Graeme, have you sat in a history class in a school these days? I think you will find it is a myth that kids are told about the blunders only. 

[lezz01]

I always think of locomotives as she. There seems to be something about large machines that just says SHE right!?

Regards Lez. 

[john new]

26 minutes ago, lezz01 said:

I always think of locomotives as she. There seems to be something about large machines that just says SHE right!?

Regards Lez. 

I read somewhere ages ago a magazine article suggested it originates from a traditional male view on life and the (thankfully slowly dying out) misogynistically inspired viewpoint that women are cantankerous beasts, often refusing to do what the man wants when he wants it and constantly requiring a firm male hand to guide them. If you go back a century or two then a married woman was still regarded as a chattel not considered in law as fit to determine her own finances. This transferred over in the male attitude towards the new machines which exhibited a similar cantankerous need to be ruled with a firm hand to prevent them running away from their controllers and doing what they wanted. These are traits in machines even today.

 

I am no psychologist but can see that there may be at least a grain of truth in suggesting it as the origins of gender assignment to machines. Humans do tend to anthropomorphise human and/or animal feelings onto inanimate objects.

 

At least these days some sanity and enlightenment prevails amongst a decent % of western based men despite the obvious redneck views of some leading personalities.

 

Edited 55 minutes ago by john new
my usual clumsy typos.