I thought the attached article from CNN on the Internet this morning was going to be interesting but then I saw where it calls us “Kookie”. Yes, I know it wasn’t CNN itself but a reference to what “non rail-fans” sometimes call us, however it was CNN that just couldn’t resist using the term to attract interest of its readers…could they? Read on by using the link below:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TRAVEL/05/08/railfan.train.watching/index.html?iref=t2test_travelfri
And here, I was looking for an Edd Byrnes reference.
I think you’re reading too much into it. Face it - if you do anything the least bit out of the ordinary (eat chips, drink beer, and grouse about TV and or Sports) someone somewhere is going to think you are “kookie”. I have a friend who is a bird watcher and after hearing some of his stories I’d have to say we don’t know what snide comments are.
I liked the article. I also liked the fact that it made a point with respect to us and how we might spend our dollars - i.e. build something like the viewing stand and perhaps we’ll drop by and while we’re there spend some money on the local economy. My friend has told me that when he and his friends visit someplace to go birding they will often spend money on the local economy (gas, food, hotel) and they make it a point to tell the various owners why they are there and why they might want to come back.
It’s a nice article. The only reference to “kooky” that I saw was a self-deprecating comment made by the subject of the story. Colored us in a pretty good light, I’d say.
A lot of us are pretty sharp kookies!
I only saw “kookie” in a quote from Cookie. I still would rather watch trains than cars going around a track for hours on end.
Glad to see Cookie and Cricket back on CNN.
Kevin
Something about this hit me the right way, and I’ve been laughing for the last 10 minutes. It must be Friday…
Damn right we are Carl!
I guess my skin was just too thin today…after reading the piece a second time, it did not seem too derogatory at all to us railfans.
It struck me as a pretty good PR piece for railfans…I didn’t read anything negative in there, in fact, it seem to promote the hobby.
I agree with tree68. Here is the only reference in the article to use any variation on the term “kook”:
“A lot of people in this town thought I was on the kooky side,” said Williams**[local Folkston railfan - a.s.**], who is retired from the paper and pulp industry. “But I love it. I’ve loved these trains ever since I was a kid.”
Self-deprecation is the word! - a.s.
Are you sure they didn’t say, “Mookie”?
[:-^]
Maybe so, maybe so…but then again, there is only one REAL Mookie!
Blalock?
Well…kookie beats boring in my book.
I don’t know about that (says he, with Nascar’s Darlington race on the TV six inches to the left of my monitor screen.) I’ve watched trains all over, ranging from 600mm gauge sugar cane lines to Shinkansen, and in half a century I didn’t see as many blazing vehicles, damaging impacts and bent sheet metal as I’ve seen in the last three hours…
Closest I’ve seen was a string of box cars that had been in the way of a tornado!
Actually, I’m more interested in the civil engineering of the right-of-way than I am in seeing modern trains. If that makes me, “Kookie,” so be it.
Chuck
I have seen some railfan antics, and I bet most of us have, for which “kookie” might well be the kindest possible term.
I hate to diss my own beloved hobby but frankly it atracts some pretty strange scooters out there.
At Waterford Avenue on Milwaukee’s South Side, we have often heard train crews tell each other “The Paparazzi are out tonight.” They are referring to us.
Dave Nelson
It doesn;t bother me they think I might be “kookie” because I know that they definitely are.
Funny - I’ve always referred to CNN as “kookie”.
I think the article is quite well written, informative, and a bit intertaining.