SouPac wrote:
Leo Marx factored prominently in my scholarship in my former life so when I saw the title of the thread I was intrigued. One of the points I think is critical is that the natural/industrial diad has always been synthetic, or a bit of a false construction based upon later 20th century morays. I wonder if the author has read any Stilgoe.
Best
Stathi
Efstathios I Pappas, MS/PhD abd
General Manager
California Western/Skunk Train
Best
Stathi
Efstathios I Pappas, MS/PhD abd
General Manager
California Western/Skunk Train
One thing about this group is it expands your vocabulary! I've got to ask what the "natural/industrial diad" is in this context; I tried looking it up, and what came up had to do with muscles and contraction and stretching or something.
I do appreciate the comments regarding "the machine in the garden." It was a sort of idealized view of industrialization--yet it also had some element of truth.
Somewhere around here I have some comments from the late David P. Morgan about how railroad fit the landscape better than a lot of other works of man. This certainly shows in satellite and aerial photos, where railroads are sometimes almost invisible lines (often they are easier to see for the curving lines of trees on the edges of their rights of way), vs. the broader ribbons and wide slabs of even secondary roads.
If I can I'll try to look those words up, but in the meantime, doesn't this late steam engine on a photo freight look like it belongs in its colorful autumn setting? To those of us who are rail enthusiasts, the scene is simply timeless--
