RMweb Gold PhilH Posted April 18, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 18, 2016 I like my gizmos and gadgets, modern communications, internet etc., but there's something about this photo makes me almost wish I was there. Different pace of life? Who knows. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10154163556392049&set=gm.1074922705897195&type=3&theater Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold russ p Posted April 18, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 18, 2016 I think I'd like to be a bit later Phil. I was watching the film ' Bargee' the other night and I was wishing if only I could upload myself into that period and stay in it without moving forward I would! Still recovering from massive electric shock as if figured the key to this action involved the bath and the TV! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
railsquid Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 Did they have central heating and inside toilets? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 No but we had rickets, TB and the average male lifespan in 1900 was 47.... Nothing wrong with a bit of nostalgia though, just remember the reality. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Reorte Posted April 18, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18, 2016 Did they have central heating and inside toilets? Central heating is nice but I think I could manage reasonably well without it, if it was the price to pay for other changes I like. I really wouldn't like to go back to outside toilets (or worse still before even those). For starters I'd have nowhere to keep the lawnmower if the toilet went back into that shed I can't tell what the OP's link is though (Facebook blocked from work), so I'll just fling out some generalities. A slower pace of life is definitely something that appeals, not that mine is anywhere near as rushed as a lot of people's, and I find it rather depressing that we're moving in the other direction. Gadgets and gizmos I enjoy to varying degrees but wouldn't regard the loss of most of them as a catastrophe (and some I'd be glad to see the back of). Harsh working conditions and hours and medicine not being up to much would be a big disincentive of moving too far back. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Reorte Posted April 18, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18, 2016 No but we had rickets, TB and the average male lifespan in 1900 was 47.... Nothing wrong with a bit of nostalgia though, just remember the reality. Lifespans are risky things to interpret, a lot of what has increased them isn't people living (that much) longer but making infant and childhood mortality a rarity instead of depressingly routine, one of the very positive changes since then. Survive that and I expect you'd be on the unlucky side not to make it past 47. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PhilH Posted April 18, 2016 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted April 18, 2016 Central heating is nice but I think I could manage reasonably well without it, if it was the price to pay for other changes I like. I really wouldn't like to go back to outside toilets (or worse still before even those). For starters I'd have nowhere to keep the lawnmower if the toilet went back into that shed I can't tell what the OP's link is though (Facebook blocked from work), so I'll just fling out some generalities. A slower pace of life is definitely something that appeals, not that mine is anywhere near as rushed as a lot of people's, and I find it rather depressing that we're moving in the other direction. Gadgets and gizmos I enjoy to varying degrees but wouldn't regard the loss of most of them as a catastrophe (and some I'd be glad to see the back of). Harsh working conditions and hours and medicine not being up to much would be a big disincentive of moving too far back. Don't know if this will work for you https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpl1/t31.0-8/13047689_10154163556392049_7534543337713980517_o.jpg I wouldn't necessarily want to live in those times, just a visit would be nice at that place at that time, to watch 'the London train' go by. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 I like my gizmos and gadgets, modern communications, internet etc., but there's something about this photo makes me almost wish I was there. Different pace of life? Who knows. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10154163556392049&set=gm.1074922705897195&type=3&theater I think this still happens at Poole, albeit the surroundings are a bit more "modern". It certainly did the last time I travelled to and from Weymouth on the train...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
railsquid Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 I'd swap my mobile phone for a regular, frequent (3 or 4 times daily) and fast postal service, if it helps. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 I'd swap my mobile phone for a regular, frequent (3 or 4 times daily) and fast postal service, if it helps. I still use a fax machine. Is the telegram service still available? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugd1022 Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 Is the telegram service still available? MESSAGE BEGINS : STOP : sadly not : STOP : MESSAGE ENDS : STOP! Sorry, couldn't resist..! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted April 18, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 18, 2016 Is the telegram service still available? Yes, you call for a Boy and give him sixpence. Mr Tulkinghorn.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted April 18, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 18, 2016 Yes, you call for a Boy and give him sixpence. Mr Tulkinghorn.. Cheapskate's. Back in the first half of the1960s my first year on 'Christmas Post' was as a 'Telegram Boy' - complete with a standard issue GPO pushbike (which I think was made of cast iron judging by the weight of it) and I got half a crown tip on delivering a telegram to Gladys Cooper on Christmas Eve. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 MESSAGE BEGINS : STOP : sadly not : STOP : MESSAGE ENDS : STOP! Sorry, couldn't resist..! PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE STOP Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sp1 Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 STOP. STOP Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonny777 Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 Yes, you call for a Boy and give him sixpence. Mr Tulkinghorn.. No, I'm sure that is something completely different and not approved of these days. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 ... depressingly routine... One of the best thoughts I have ever heard about pre-industrial revolution life for the large majority of the population, was that this was all life could be. Most of the time it was simply a slog to maintain the means of existence. Hard physical work for enough food, safe liquid to drink, shelter and warmth, maintaining and cleaning clothing and footwear. It is very telling that the UK rural population moved en masse from the countryside to the 'dark satanic mills'. A comfortable fop like Blake might so characterise them, but unless most of the people finding employment there were past reason, it must have been a better life. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Reorte Posted April 18, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18, 2016 One of the best thoughts I have ever heard about pre-industrial revolution life for the large majority of the population, was that this was all life could be. Most of the time it was simply a slog to maintain the means of existence. Hard physical work for enough food, safe liquid to drink, shelter and warmth, maintaining and cleaning clothing and footwear. It is very telling that the UK rural population moved en masse from the countryside to the 'dark satanic mills'. A comfortable fop like Blake might so characterise them, but unless most of the people finding employment there were past reason, it must have been a better life. It paid better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 Lifespans are risky things to interpret, a lot of what has increased them isn't people living (that much) longer but making infant and childhood mortality a rarity instead of depressingly routine, one of the very positive changes since then. Survive that and I expect you'd be on the unlucky side not to make it past 47. True to a degree but essentially irrelevant. The average male lifespan was still 47, you had to survive infancy which many didn't. And we are undoubtedly living to greater ages, it is about more than reduced infant mortality. Survival rates for all sorts of illnesses are improving, we have far more octagenarians, nonagenarians and centenarians than ever before. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Reorte Posted April 18, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18, 2016 True to a degree but essentially irrelevant. The average male lifespan was still 47, you had to survive infancy which many didn't. And we are undoubtedly living to greater ages, it is about more than reduced infant mortality. Survival rates for all sorts of illnesses are improving, we have far more octagenarians, nonagenarians and centenarians than ever before. I disagree that it's irrelevent. The impression it gives is that you had a resaonable chance of being alive before 47, and not such a good one of being alive after it, when it was in reality either a (rather approximately) similar lifespan to now or practically none. It can give a rather erroneous impression of life back then. As a rough indication of overall improvements in medicine that difference is perhaps less relevent but I feel it should be qualified as such otherwise it feels a bit misleading. The upper limit is increasing but like I said I don't think that accounts for the lion's share of the change. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 One of the best thoughts I have ever heard about pre-industrial revolution life for the large majority of the population, was that this was all life could be. Most of the time it was simply a slog to maintain the means of existence. Hard physical work for enough food, safe liquid to drink, shelter and warmth, maintaining and cleaning clothing and footwear. It is very telling that the UK rural population moved en masse from the countryside to the 'dark satanic mills'. A comfortable fop like Blake might so characterise them, but unless most of the people finding employment there were past reason, it must have been a better life. There's a recentish book, The Utopia Experiment, Dylan Evans, 2015. He funded a 'survivalist, opt out of the modern world' camp in Scotland. The aim was to be self sufficient. As you might expect, it attracted all sorts of odd characters and was a bit of a disaster. The key point here was that he could not believe how hard the life actually was. Visions of a honest day's toil in the fields followed by deep discussions over a hearty supper were soon dispelled. The work was gruelingly hard, everything was a chore and at the end of the day they were eating luke warm stews before falling into damp beds. He commented that you cannot imagine how difficult it is to clean porridge out of a communal pan with no detergent and cold water. After eighteen months they still visited Tesco once a week. Truly, we don't know how lucky we are. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 There's a recentish book, The Utopia Experiment, Dylan Evans, 2015. He funded a 'survivalist, opt out of the modern world' camp in Scotland. The aim was to be self sufficient. As you might expect, it attracted all sorts of odd characters and was a bit of a disaster.... Haven't we been here before? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bon Accord Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 True to a degree but essentially irrelevant. The average male lifespan was still 47, you had to survive infancy which many didn't. And we are undoubtedly living to greater ages, it is about more than reduced infant mortality. Survival rates for all sorts of illnesses are improving, we have far more octagenarians, nonagenarians and centenarians than ever before. But for the generations coming on, who will (maybe) live to those great ages, what of their quality of life? Retirement in your 70s/80s, poor pension prospects, saddled with huge amounts of debt which will inevitably be inherited by the next generation, no job security whatsoever, some of the longest working hours in Europe, ever increasing levels of stress. Basically, working like blazes your entire life just to tread water. Life was much harder in the past, but contentment was satisfied much easier. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 I disagree that it's irrelevent. The impression it gives is that you had a resaonable chance of being alive before 47, and not such a good one of being alive after it, when it was in reality either a (rather approximately) similar lifespan to now or practically none. It can give a rather erroneous impression of life back then. As a rough indication of overall improvements in medicine that difference is perhaps less relevent but I feel it should be qualified as such otherwise it feels a bit misleading. The upper limit is increasing but like I said I don't think that accounts for the lion's share of the change. When Lloyd George introduced the Old Age Pension, the average duration for which it was expected to be drawn was four years, IIRC. Yes, there were people who survived into their eighties and nineties, but these were the exception to the rule. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 Which is one reason for the so called 'pension crisis', huge numbers of people drawing pensions for not three of for years but for tens of years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.