“When I do buy MR, what do I find? What I find is a magazine seemingly devoted to shake-together kits and ready-to-run models…I think MR could be a great modelbuilder’s magazine instead of the mediocre one it is.”
What, you missed it? It’s right there on page 13…of the June 1973 edition.
Some things never change…although the writer eventually got his wish on this count:
“And while I’m on the subject of valuable space, your column Student Fare is a fiasco. Kids have no place in an adult hobby, and just because a teeny-bopper lays a circle of N gauge track on top of a table and runs some ready-to-run equipment over it is no reason to print a picture of his silly railroad when the space could be used for something worthwhile–something that would interest a serious model railroader.”
That comment about Student Fare and younger modelers in the hobby really ticks me off… How does he think the hobby will survive without younger modelers? Is he planning on living forever??[banghead]
Of course, I’m not one to be an outsider to that comment, he’s basically insulting me and many of my friends…
I was 12 when that letter was printed and it ticks me off even now at 48! I may have been just a kid then but I had already built a couple of good looking layouts. Where the heck does he get off thinking that there’s no room in the hobby for kids? Model Railroading an adults only hobby? Maybe it is somewhere in the deep recesses of the cobwebs at the back of his mind!
I’d forgotten about that letter. I was a subscriber at the time (and a student), and I recall feeling that it was out of character for such a letter to appear in MR. I also recall that I agreed with the author to some extent: It did seem that the magazine included articles that really just paraphrased the instructions from a kit, and Student Fare always bugged me: Even as a student (I was a junior in high school) I wanted to know that if I submitted photos of my work that it would be selected or not selected based on the same criteria as any other modeler - I didn’t want any special consideration because of my age or circumstances, but that was just me. Student Fare continued, so the overall response to it must have been favorable.
That said, I continued to subscribe to MR because it also included articles that challenged me to learn to do new things; the photography was great; columns like Bull Session were both fun and educational, and At The Throttle (Linn Westcott’s editorial) was worth the cost of the subscription all by itself. Then, as now, the axiom “Different strokes for different folks” applied well to our hobby (I think that was one of Linn’s topics).
Ya I kinda remember that I was a reader / subscriber back then. In June 1973 I would have been…let’s see, carry the one…14. To be fair, the first few years of Student Fare weren’t that great. A pic of a flat-top layout with RTR equipment, and a bunch of letters pretty much all like this:
Hi!! My name is Bobby. I’m 12. I love trains!! If you like trains, write to me!! Bye, Bobby
Hi!! My name is Sam. I’m 9 and live in El Waco, California. I love trains!!
And I’ll step up and take your place. This guy is a completly and total numbskull. We teenage modlers can build stuff just as good as you older folks. Just look at tyler’s layout, or mine, or GG’s, or a host of others. And yeah, this hobby will die w/o us young guns. This guy really ticks me off!!! [:(!]
the [soapbox] is open for whoever else wants it next.
It’s an adult hobby? When did they pass that rule. I must have missed it.
I’ll be right back. I have to go tell my grandchildren they have to stay out of the train room from now on.
I suppose I can bring Thomas The Tank Engine & Hogwart’s Express out to visit them once in a while while I play hobby around with the real model trains.
I have to agree with Jeff and the others who were teenagers at the time of that letter – and who are still model railroaders now. Being 16 y.o. at the time, like them I think it’s a good thing we weren’t offended by MR, just by the author of the letter. Talking about it now is a good reminder to try to avoid being an obnoxious old geezer, even as we chronologically sink in geezerhood. [:D]
Because they lack the perspective of what model railroading had been in the decades leading up to when this gentleman wrote his letter to MR, many of the responders may have been a little too quick to pass judgement on him.
Back in the 30’s, 40’s and much of the 50’s scale model railroaders consisted almost totally of very talented and skilled adults. Tinplate was considered the proper venue of teens and younger kids and MR itself often referred to HO as an “adult hobby” in its editorials, although by the 1950’s it already had a considerable teen following.
The advent of inexpensive RTR locomotives by Mantua and then PennLine, followed by a flood of simple shake-the-box plastic rolling stock from various manufacturers by the late 50’s, was considered a ruining of the hobby by many of the oldtimers, those who had mainly been wooden kit, or scatchbuilders of great accomplishment. Admittedly, the nature of the hobby did change very dramatically and many longtime modelers resented that alteration so it is easy to see the source of displeasure. I expect that the letter’s author was one of these types.
One must understand the full scope of the hobby’s history to appreciate what generates opinions expressed at specific times.
Look at the good side. Since the comment was made when I was about half my present age (allowing for the usual editorial lag) the commenter is probably dead - more likely of apoplexy than old age!
If that was his position 35 years ago, where would his indignation meter register with:
Manufactured, prefab benchwork?
Layout kits?
Professionally built model railroads - ‘turnkey’ empires?
Of course, this goes right along with, “I used to walk to school in the snow - five miles - uphill both ways…” bovine excrement then, and even more so today.
Interestingly, MR used to run feature articles on custom builders who would gladly build superdetailed one-off models of any locomotive you wanted. IIRC, the lowest price mentioned was $625 (transition era dollars) for an 0-6-0T about equivalent to the Bachmann Spectrum Alco…
Let’s all count our blessings and keep on piggybacking…
I guess even back then you had to be fair and objective and print both sides, after all people do have opinions and even if we don’t agree I guess the idea is to make us think. I wonder if he eventually changed his mind?
I was a young whipper-snapper when that comment was made; and I’ve worked hard for a long time since to become an old geezer! Old geezers are people too. And some of us have grandchildren who we want to share our trains with. [:)]