Jump to content
 

BBC Four - James May's Big Trouble in Model Britain


AY Mod
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium
6 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

I cannot think of a faultless model that has been made. OOgauge itself is a compromise of HO.

 

 

 

The Hornby (see what I did there?) Class 60 gets very, very close. (apart from the narrow gauge)

 

Cheers,

Mick

  • Like 4
  • Agree 1
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Well thanks Ed (!)

 

I'm sorry about that, I was interrupted at a key moment, then pressed the wrong button, then a customer came into the shop and spoiled my train of thought, but he did at least buy something!

 

While we await the next post, here is a snap of a customer of mine in his earlier years - the figure in the middle. This was his first ever firing turn, a run out of Waterloo to Basingstoke and return. Martin said that he "didn't get all of the coal in all the right places" on this run, but the driver apparently nonetheless kept his sense of humour!

 

Martinweb.jpg.a904e054bd15c36cadc56f34c166ca4d.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Not Jeremy said:

While we await the next post, here is a snap of a customer of mine in his earlier years - the figure in the middle. This was his first ever firing turn, a run out of Waterloo to Basingstoke and return. Martin said that he "didn't get all of the coal in all the right places" on this run, but the driver apparently nonetheless kept his sense of humour!

 

As long as it went into the firebox and not all over the driver or out the sides :)

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 minutes ago, Captain Kernow said:

Did your chum have any insights into the great cooking breakfast on the shovel debate, by the way?

 

 

Not that I recall, but his mate probably said it was much more difficult on a Warship...

 

1141871378_Warshipcab.jpg.dce50fc144aacdbe6353c0c6159f0790.jpg

  • Like 5
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
3 minutes ago, Not Jeremy said:

 

Not that I recall, but his mate probably said it was much more difficult on a Warship...

 

1141871378_Warshipcab.jpg.dce50fc144aacdbe6353c0c6159f0790.jpg

It is a well known fact that when on a Warship a shovel was a very necessary tool.

N. Jeneer

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think books are an age thing, we love our books, our daughter who loves reading never buys books other than down loading them on to an electronic device

 

For me not so interested in reading, but depend on my railway books for both plans and reference

 

I like it now most railway books are cheap second hand, saves me a fortune

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding primary sources and nom de plumes, these were common in the late Victorian and Edwardian era. One of the best-known early motorcycling journalists hid his dog-collar behind the “Ixion” strap-Line, for example. Short story writer Saki (H H Munro) was another well known example. It just “wasn’t done” for certain categories of people.

 

There were also issues of copyright and liability, at a time when commercial and professional operational procedures weren’t as well defined as today, and unlimited liability was common. 

 

Definitely agree about the reliability, or otherwise of original drawings, though. I’ve seen original drawings (or more correctly, copies of them) from London Underground and from various other utility sources of the 1890-1930 period, which aren't really much more than indicative general arrangements, which would be interpreted by the construction team to fit the location. Given the difficulty of making copies, and the low status of draughtsmen in the engineering hierarchy of the period, it couldn’t really be any other way, I suppose. 

 

 

 

 

  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just (one hour ago) bought from ebay "buy it now" a bound volume Model Railway Constructor for the year 1945 - cost £7.95 + £3 P/P


I like old railway / model railway mags - especially bound vols - just like a book !!!!  A little splurge for just over a tenner - and for me much more enjoyable reading  than a couple of current mags from WH Smith, (and no bl**dy Hattons / Rails adverts either !!!!!!!!!!!!).

 

Brit15

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Ah, primary sources.  Now Swindon (yes the GWR bit) was notorious for producing GA drawings whc were - shall I say - at times apt to be somewhat misleading mainly because they portrayed the way the Drawing oFfdice thought a ;opv co should be built rather than the way the factory actually built it (I have exaggerated a little -bit now an example).   A while back I was involved, deeply involved as it happens, in researching prototype detail for a loco and had the good fortune to aquire through a contact a copy of the ortiginal Swindon GA drawing.  A copy of the drawing duly went off to the factory (together with numerous photos, a written spec, and so on).  Fairly late on in reviewing the CADs I finally noticed that there were no cylinder draincocks included so the designer in China was diuly tipped off and back came a request to know wehat they looked like and exactly where they went because they had not been shown on the original drawing.

 

Now I'm absolutely certain that no lov co engineer worth his salt would design an engine without cylinder draincocks, but in this case he had.  I suspect it had happened because he was working off a much older drawing to develop a modern version of the engine concerned and I bet the original as built pbably had no drain cock control rods from the cab so the cocks weren't on the drawing.   So primary resources yes - but don't forget the bag of Saxa.

 

Now the danger of secondary sources.  I am absolutely fed up with being told, some tmes from lofty heights - that the Midland Railway avoided facing points like the plague in a manner which suggests they were different from every other railway in the land.  In reality they were no different from any other railway, the same 'rules' (i.e. the Board of Trade/Dept of Transport Requirements) applied equally to every single railway and their compliance with the Requirements was subject to inspection and approval of all new works.  The Midland was no different from any other railway - they all had to avoid facing points except where they were essentially required such as at junctions, and Midland railway junctions had facing points so they didn't go round avoiding them..

Hi Mike

I wasn't suggesting that a single primary source can be taken as "the truth" and they do have to be approached with caution. Working drawings, to take an obvious example, were often rather different from what finally emerged so do need to be compared with photos and other knowledge. If the real thing is still around to be studied so much the better but even then you have to allow for later modificiations. You may well have to use several sources to get at the facts and sometimes accept that some facts are simply lost to history.

 

Nevertheless, primary sources can enable you to find things out that haven't been fully explored before  For example, just to draw up a fairly simple set of track diagrams over the ages for one small ferry port, I had to use several sources including old postcards, town plans, plans drawn up for a major redevelopment, some very early photos in an online library, aerial survey photos, private photos and home movies and even a couple of newsreels. No one of those provided a complete answer but, taken together, I'm pretty confident that they did; complete enough for my purposes in any case.

 

Original materials also enable you to check secondary sources and often to identify those authors who do their research thoroughly and those who are downright sloppy.

Edited by Pacific231G
spelling
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, adb968008 said:

I cannot think of a faultless model that has been made. OOgauge itself is a compromise of HO.

And in truth, most H0 models are somewhat compromised too by the wider tyres of even RP25/88 wheelsets. (But at least H0 starts by trying to keep to scale, OO gives up on scale before it even starts) I have though just been reading the March 1957 Railway Modeller introducing the exciting new TT-3 scale, just announced by Tri-ang. It's interesting in one way to read the justification - I assume it was written by CJF- of the even greater compromise that involved.

 

3 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Restorers of preserved vehicles  often have slight or major modifications to suit todays environment that the subject never originally had or have to make changes based on assumptions too based on available evidence.

 

It was good though, when they had all the Kings at Didcot a few years ago, to finally hear the authentic sound of  several Great Western Westinghouse pumps clattering away. Most of the earlier preservationists seemed to miss those off. :haha:

 

Edited by Pacific231G
  • Like 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
17 minutes ago, Pacific231G said:

And in truth, most H0 models are somewhat compromised too by the wider tyres of even RP25/88 wheelsets. (But at least H0 starts by trying to keep to scale, OO gives up on scale before it even starts) I have though just been reading the March 1957 Railway Modeller introducing the exciting new TT-3 scale, just announced by Tri-ang. It's interesting in one way to read the justification - I assume it was written by CJF- of the even greater compromise that involved.

 

It was good though, when they had all the Kings at Didcot a few years ago, to finally hear the authentic sound of  several Great Western Westinghouse pumps clattering away. Most of the earlier preservationists seemed to miss those off. :haha:

 

 

Ive seen more Polish ex-PKP steam locomotive air pumps working in the UK than  I suspect there are still working in Poland.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
6 hours ago, Not Jeremy said:

 

I can't stand it any more!!

 

Whilst not necessarily disagreeing with any of the above, this last just can't go unchallenged.

 

1.) Errors do not arise from using secondary sources if they are correct or reviewed and used appropriately, and in any case many many books are and have been based upon original research.

 

2.) "Position and selection bias of the writer" oh right, and this never affects anything on the Internet? 

 

3.) Following on from the above, Noms de plume apart, writers of books invariably don't "hide" behind the asinine or obscure usernames that the Internet is riddled with. I would suggest that for any author then putting your actual name to something - in print - will give you cause to try and make sure you do not make mistakes. Or talk rhubarb , well maybe not....

 

4.) Speaking as a publisher, I can assure you that spending many thousands of pounds on printing a book is another pretty strong motivation for trying to get it right. Of course nothing in this world is perfect, but I am venturing to suggest that the world of books and print publishing is, in general terms, streets ahead of the mass of unreviewed information that is "freely available" on the Internet.

 

Yes, I am aware of digitising information projects etc, but this is mostly in the world of scholarly and academic publishing which is an entirely different kettle of fish, and not what we generally look at in our interests.

 

All of which is not to decry the wonder of the Internet, which does without a doubt represent a challenge to printed media.

 

From an alternative viewpoint then I would highlight the fantastic resource that Paul Bartlett has provided for us as being particularly splendid. But think about it, apart from the odd hosting issues, Paul has changed how he operates and by now to get a really useful image you need to contact him and pay for either a decent download or an actual print.

 

And what happens to the resource of information when Paul dies or otherwise tires of maintaining it?

 

So the book is not dead.

 

As regards secondhand prices etc, well yes. Except, as others have noted, certain books and references remain in demand.

 

I would however agree that there is an absolute wealth of printed codswallop out there, the best thing for all of it is to go into recycling.

 

Just think, if we tried really hard then even having Paul Atterbury's name on a book might not be quite the commercial kiss of death that it currently is...

 

With apologies to Paul Atterbury, who has put his name to a lot of very nice looking books! 

 

Simon Castens

 

Sitting in a specialist railway bookshop on a sunny day with no customers, hmmmmm

 

 

 

I don't think anybody has ever suggested the Internet is perfect, however people tend to be less immediately trusting of Internet sources than of books. And the digitising of archives and original source material is making it easier to refer to primary sources which can only be good. Obviously you need to be able to interpret such sources and have sufficient knowledge to sort wheat from chaff but that is an essential skill of researching.

 

On secondary sources, unless you fully understand the subject and in some cases have a certain familiarity with primary materials then you are not in a position to really determine the veracity (or otherwise) of secondary material. And this is becoming a bigger problem in general, more and more of the publications I read are reliant on secondary sources and there is an echo chamber effect in that once a theory has been referenced enough times it creates the impression that there is an overwhelming body of evidence to support it when in some cases there is a paucity of actual data and original research in support. I've noticed this becoming a problem in the academic and scientific communities, I have had a huge argument (to use the more polite term) with an eminent academic because in the face of several test reports which challenge accepted orthodoxy his attitude was that a report based on a literature review must be taken as being more valuable than measured data which kicked the props out from under it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Not Jeremy said:

 

I can't stand it any more!!

 

Whilst not necessarily disagreeing with any of the above, this last just can't go unchallenged.

 

1.) Errors do not arise from using secondary sources if they are correct or reviewed and used appropriately, and in any case many many books are and have been based upon original research.

 

2.) "Position and selection bias of the writer" oh right, and this never affects anything on the Internet? 

 

3.) Following on from the above, Noms de plume apart, writers of books invariably don't "hide" behind the asinine or obscure usernames that the Internet is riddled with. I would suggest that for any author then putting your actual name to something - in print - will give you cause to try and make sure you do not make mistakes. Or talk rhubarb , well maybe not....

 

4.) Speaking as a publisher, I can assure you that spending many thousands of pounds on printing a book is another pretty strong motivation for trying to get it right. Of course nothing in this world is perfect, but I am venturing to suggest that the world of books and print publishing is, in general terms, streets ahead of the mass of unreviewed information that is "freely available" on the Internet.

 

Yes, I am aware of digitising information projects etc, but this is mostly in the world of scholarly and academic publishing which is an entirely different kettle of fish, and not what we generally look at in our interests.

 

All of which is not to decry the wonder of the Internet, which does without a doubt represent a challenge to printed media.

 

From an alternative viewpoint then I would highlight the fantastic resource that Paul Bartlett has provided for us as being particularly splendid. But think about it, apart from the odd hosting issues, Paul has changed how he operates and by now to get a really useful image you need to contact him and pay for either a decent download or an actual print.

 

And what happens to the resource of information when Paul dies or otherwise tires of maintaining it?

 

So the book is not dead.

 

As regards secondhand prices etc, well yes. Except, as others have noted, certain books and references remain in demand.

 

I would however agree that there is an absolute wealth of printed codswallop out there, the best thing for all of it is to go into recycling.

 

Just think, if we tried really hard then even having Paul Atterbury's name on a book might not be quite the commercial kiss of death that it currently is...

 

With apologies to Paul Atterbury, who has put his name to a lot of very nice looking books! 

 

Simon Castens

 

Sitting in a specialist railway bookshop on a sunny day with no customers, hmmmmm

 

 

Absolutely agree with everything you've written here. I get sick of hearing how wonderful the internet is. It's probably OK if you're seeking American information but its of only moderate help in any of the research that I do. The internet is a starting point - usually because it leads me to a book. Here's a test - what's the length, width and height of an LBSCR 'Terrier'? - Quote your source, please. As far as Paul Bartlett's priceless archive is concerned, I'm sure he'll have a plan for it. I've known Paul since we were both members of the old Staines Model Railway Society back in the mid-1960s. Other club members called us 'the dirty wagon brigade' although I was only ever on the edge of Paul's efforts which included not only photographing but (with several other modellers) measuring and drawing the wagons. Of course, a lot of their work has appeared in books and magazines over the years. (CJL)

Edited by dibber25
  • Like 4
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dibber25 said:

Here's a test - what's the length, width and height of an LBSCR 'Terrier'? - Quote your source, please.  (CJL)

 

26' 1/2"

7'2" (over footplate)

11'3" to chimney top

 

The Brighton Terriers C J Binnie, The Ravensbourne Press, 1969

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
6 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

I just feel sorry for those who cannot see the attraction of a good book or think that the printed page has no future, whatever the subject matter, but then again, there's no accounting for taste.

 

Have you tried offering free ice creams with every copy of MRJ?

 

Books rarely run out of battery life either :) 

 

One day of sunshine and he abandons pasties! While I heartily support the idea I feel pasties are a more suitable snack while perusing a good article as you tend to find the ice cream has melted if it's good.

  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
3 hours ago, dibber25 said:

Here's a test - what's the length, width and height of an LBSCR 'Terrier'? - Quote your source, please. 

 

It depends... Hornby or Dapol?

 

(Yippee, we finally got back on topic!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
10 hours ago, Not Jeremy said:

 

I can't stand it any more!!

 

Whilst not necessarily disagreeing with any of the above, this last just can't go unchallenged.

 

1.) Errors do not arise from using secondary sources if they are correct or reviewed and used appropriately, and in any case many many books are and have been based upon original research.

 

2.) "Position and selection bias of the writer" oh right, and this never affects anything on the Internet? 

 

3.) Following on from the above, Noms de plume apart, writers of books invariably don't "hide" behind the asinine or obscure usernames that the Internet is riddled with. I would suggest that for any author then putting your actual name to something - in print - will give you cause to try and make sure you do not make mistakes. Or talk rhubarb , well maybe not....

 

4.) Speaking as a publisher, I can assure you that spending many thousands of pounds on printing a book is another pretty strong motivation for trying to get it right. Of course nothing in this world is perfect, but I am venturing to suggest that the world of books and print publishing is, in general terms, streets ahead of the mass of unreviewed information that is "freely available" on the Internet.

 

Yes, I am aware of digitising information projects etc, but this is mostly in the world of scholarly and academic publishing which is an entirely different kettle of fish, and not what we generally look at in our interests.

 

All of which is not to decry the wonder of the Internet, which does without a doubt represent a challenge to printed media.

 

From an alternative viewpoint then I would highlight the fantastic resource that Paul Bartlett has provided for us as being particularly splendid. But think about it, apart from the odd hosting issues, Paul has changed how he operates and by now to get a really useful image you need to contact him and pay for either a decent download or an actual print.

 

And what happens to the resource of information when Paul dies or otherwise tires of maintaining it?

 

So the book is not dead.

 

As regards secondhand prices etc, well yes. Except, as others have noted, certain books and references remain in demand.

 

I would however agree that there is an absolute wealth of printed codswallop out there, the best thing for all of it is to go into recycling.

 

Just think, if we tried really hard then even having Paul Atterbury's name on a book might not be quite the commercial kiss of death that it currently is...

 

With apologies to Paul Atterbury, who has put his name to a lot of very nice looking books! 

 

Simon Castens

 

Sitting in a specialist railway bookshop on a sunny day with no customers, hmmmmm

 

 

I agree with much that you have written Simon.

I personally would prefer a book to an internet rendering any day.

However we should not assume the printed word is any more sacrosanct than any other form of publishing.

Many years ago I had to provide a thesis.  My tutor, who provided much good advise, finally advised me to run though my list of refences and ensure that each and every one was correct by physically going to the point of reference.  This worked well for all accept one.  How could I have got this wrong?  I tracked down several other authors who reported the very same ( and now clearly incorrect) reference.   I eventually did track down the original reference - a simple transposition of digits.  The error had first been made some 18 months after the original publication and subsequent authors had continued to misquote the reference because they had never gone back to the original document.  All of the documents had been peer reviewed before publishing.  I had been as guilty as the others in reporting a reference that I had not actually viewed myself.  And thus are "facts" built into our perception of the world.

  • Like 3
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
4 hours ago, dibber25 said:

 The internet is a starting point - usually because it leads me to a book. Here's a test - what's the length, width and height of an LBSCR 'Terrier'? - Quote your source, please. . (CJL)

 

3 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

26' 1/2"

7'2" (over footplate)

11'3" to chimney top

 

The Brighton Terriers C J Binnie, The Ravensbourne Press, 1969

This is an excellent illustration of how sources work or can lead to problems.  On the basis of his background and training I would expect Colin Binnie to have gone to a reputable source for his information so as written I wouldn't doubt the veracity of the source quoted by 'Edwardian'.

 

But now let's compare them with the figures quoted in Brian Haresnape's 'Stroudley Locomotives' published by Ian Allan in 1985, wherein might lie an interesting tale (the drawing which is the source for these figures is for an A1X).

Length over buffers 26' 1/2"

'Maximum width of engine' 8' 3". (there is no end elevation so it might be across the footsteps at their widest point)

Height to top of chimney 11'  3/16"

 

Now to the interesting bit.  In 1937 the Railway Publishing Company published a book titled 'British Locomotive Types' Which states on the title page in respect of its contents (a selection of loco drawings) 'Compiled by THE RAILWAY GAZETTE from official drawing supplied by the Chief Mechanical Engineers of the for mainline railways'.  By 1939 the book had reached its 4th edition.  The drawings would appear to have been the work of Charles Lake who wrote the foreword as well.  So from a pedigree of a respectable, railway industry publishing house one could perhaps assume a level of accuracy particularly as the railway companies were stated to be the source of the information.

 

But note the height to top of chimney is almost 3 inches different from that quoted in the Binnie book.  And the dimensions quoted in The Railway Publishing Co. book are exactly the same as those quoted in the Ian Allan publication although for those who know that will hardly come as a surprise because that company had been taken over by Ian Allan at some time and and in fact it is the original Charles Lake drawing which appears in Haresnape's book (and in most of the others in the series he wrote which included Stroudley).  And Binnie's book is listed in the bibliography in Brian Haresnape's book.

 

I know from Brian Haresnape's daughter that Alec Swain did a lot of the technical stuff for Brian Haresnape's series although his assistance isn't acknowledged most of the time and knowing Alec - with whom I worked for some years - as a trained loco engineer he would not be one to leave stones unturned and questions unanswered.  In this case the correct answer can be easily established because there are real engines out there to measure but here we have two sources which disagree in respect of a fairly important measurement,  I wonder what it might say on any websites?  And equally I wonder which source reviewers might use to check dimensions on the models (even if it is barely 1mm in 4mm scale)?

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

 

This is an excellent illustration of how sources work or can lead to problems.  On the basis of his background and training I would expect Colin Binnie to have gone to a reputable source for his information so as written I wouldn't doubt the veracity of the source quoted by 'Edwardian'.

 

But now let's compare them with the figures quoted in Brian Haresnape's 'Stroudley Locomotives' published by Ian Allan in 1985, wherein might lie an interesting tale (the drawing which is the source for these figures is for an A1X).

Length over buffers 26' 1/2"

'Maximum width of engine' 8' 3". (there is no end elevation so it might be across the footsteps at their widest point)

Height to top of chimney 11'  3/16"

 

Now to the interesting bit.  In 1937 the Railway Publishing Company published a book titled 'British Locomotive Types' Which states on the title page in respect of its contents (a selection of loco drawings) 'Compiled by THE RAILWAY GAZETTE from official drawing supplied by the Chief Mechanical Engineers of the for mainline railways'.  By 1939 the book had reached its 4th edition.  The drawings would appear to have been the work of Charles Lake who wrote the foreword as well.  So from a pedigree of a respectable, railway industry publishing house one could perhaps assume a level of accuracy particularly as the railway companies were stated to be the source of the information.

 

But note the height to top of chimney is almost 3 inches different from that quoted in the Binnie book.  And the dimensions quoted in The Railway Publishing Co. book are exactly the same as those quoted in the Ian Allan publication although for those who know that will hardly come as a surprise because that company had been taken over by Ian Allan at some time and and in fact it is the original Charles Lake drawing which appears in Haresnape's book (and in most of the others in the series he wrote which included Stroudley).  And Binnie's book is listed in the bibliography in Brian Haresnape's book.

 

I know from Brian Haresnape's daughter that Alec Swain did a lot of the technical stuff for Brian Haresnape's series although his assistance isn't acknowledged most of the time and knowing Alec - with whom I worked for some years - as a trained loco engineer he would not be one to leave stones unturned and questions unanswered.  In this case the correct answer can be easily established because there are real engines out there to measure but here we have two sources which disagree in respect of a fairly important measurement,  I wonder what it might say on any websites?  And equally I wonder which source reviewers might use to check dimensions on the models (even if it is barely 1mm in 4mm scale)?

BH used lots of assistance without necessarily acknowledging it. I 'ghost-wrote' at least one article for him. He was, however, an avid Brighton man (hence he got a Brush Type 2 and D1015 painted in 'Improved Engine Green'). One can assume a good degree of accuracy where 'Terriers' are concerned - his headed notepaper even featured a side elevation drawing of one. As to sources - I'll use whatever I can find and it's often not possible to cross-check them for accuracy. In the case of my original question about 'Terrier' dimensions, I ran out of time and was unable to track down those vital dimensions through either the internet or books that were available to me. A hazard of deadlines. (CJL)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Mallard60022 said:

It is a well known fact that when on a Warship a shovel was a very necessary tool.

N. Jeneer

 

.... and a blooming great hammer!

 

8 hours ago, hayfield said:

I think books are an age thing, we love our books, our daughter who loves reading never buys books other than down loading them on to an electronic device

 

For me not so interested in reading, but depend on my railway books for both plans and reference

 

I like it now most railway books are cheap second hand, saves me a fortune

 

I don't think it is as simple as that. I am in my early 30s and love books, real books, and steer clear of e-books to be honest. Not that I am adverse to technology at all, it's just that I like having the physical item to pour over. I am not at all as precious with music, I am happy to use digital formats; I haven't played a CD in years and all of my collection has now been packed away in the loft. I am really not a material person at all, and live quite a minimalistic and (some tell me!) simplistic lifestyle, but buying the odd reference book remains my one personal indulgence.

 

Having said that, I may use e-books in the future but I would only do it for fiction. I am a massive reader of European thrillers, borrowing from my local library, but would be tempted to do this using an e-book reader one day, if it becomes easier. Certainly my branch library already offers such a service, although I admit I haven't been tempted to use it yet. What I would miss is the opportunity to browse, spend time picking and choosing my books, based on the blurb and even frivolous things like a cover that stands out! However, I certainly wouldn't want to use one for non-fiction and reference books. I would always want to stick to the physical book. Just personal preference but I think my fiction reading is purely for entertainment and escapism, my non-fiction reading, whilst also for interest and enjoyment, is principally to learn things, so I come at it with a different approach and attitude.

 

Now I may be the exception to the rule but I don't just think it's an age thing. Granted I am probably not the same generation as your daughter, I imagine teenagers and those in their 20s have embraced this technology with far more gusto, but I will stick to real books and their wonderful, unique feel (and even smell!) for now! 

 

12 hours ago, Not Jeremy said:

 

I can't stand it any more!!

 

Whilst not necessarily disagreeing with any of the above, this last just can't go unchallenged.

 

1.) Errors do not arise from using secondary sources if they are correct or reviewed and used appropriately, and in any case many many books are and have been based upon original research.

 

2.) "Position and selection bias of the writer" oh right, and this never affects anything on the Internet? 

 

3.) Following on from the above, Noms de plume apart, writers of books invariably don't "hide" behind the asinine or obscure usernames that the Internet is riddled with. I would suggest that for any author then putting your actual name to something - in print - will give you cause to try and make sure you do not make mistakes. Or talk rhubarb , well maybe not....

 

4.) Speaking as a publisher, I can assure you that spending many thousands of pounds on printing a book is another pretty strong motivation for trying to get it right. Of course nothing in this world is perfect, but I am venturing to suggest that the world of books and print publishing is, in general terms, streets ahead of the mass of unreviewed information that is "freely available" on the Internet.

 

Yes, I am aware of digitising information projects etc, but this is mostly in the world of scholarly and academic publishing which is an entirely different kettle of fish, and not what we generally look at in our interests.

 

All of which is not to decry the wonder of the Internet, which does without a doubt represent a challenge to printed media.

 

From an alternative viewpoint then I would highlight the fantastic resource that Paul Bartlett has provided for us as being particularly splendid. But think about it, apart from the odd hosting issues, Paul has changed how he operates and by now to get a really useful image you need to contact him and pay for either a decent download or an actual print.

 

And what happens to the resource of information when Paul dies or otherwise tires of maintaining it?

 

So the book is not dead.

 

As regards secondhand prices etc, well yes. Except, as others have noted, certain books and references remain in demand.

 

I would however agree that there is an absolute wealth of printed codswallop out there, the best thing for all of it is to go into recycling.

 

Just think, if we tried really hard then even having Paul Atterbury's name on a book might not be quite the commercial kiss of death that it currently is...

 

With apologies to Paul Atterbury, who has put his name to a lot of very nice looking books! 

 

Simon Castens

 

Sitting in a specialist railway bookshop on a sunny day with no customers, hmmmmm

 

 

 

Simon - thanks for that, your insight as a professional 'book person' (sorry for the clunky term but I couldn't think of a description to encompass all your roles from bookshop owner to publisher etc). I for one am glad to hear that the book is not dead!! 

 

Cheers,

David (who hopes one day to visit your wonderful shop and spend some hard-earned money on some real books, when he can make the epic journey to the deep south) 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...