On another discussion board there was a thread about the history of some equipment. And it was clear that some folks were making extraordinary efforts to pin down some very detailed and obscure information about some rather unremarkable equipment. Nothing wrong with that.

But it made me think about the people angle. Do we make the same kind of effort to learn about and document the lives of the people who possessed the skills to either build or use that equipment. I wonder how many of our museums have exhibits that try to interprete the lives of the folks who were involved with the equipment on display....or rode in it...or had their necessities of life delivered by it.

I wonder if this is part of the dividing line between clubs and museums that was discussed a few weeks ago.



jbwest@att.net

I wonder how many of our
> museums have exhibits that try to interprete
> the lives of the folks who were involved
> with the equipment on display....or rode in
> it...or had their necessities of life
> delivered by it.

> I wonder if this is part of the dividing
> line between clubs and museums that was
> discussed a few weeks ago.

It does not have to be.

A museum can have a mission that involves interpreting the history of a technology, or it can have a mission that involves interpreting the impact of a technology on society and on people's lives. For the first, the human stories you speak of might be tangential. For the second, they would be central.

The technological museum might interpret the rise of the diesel by showing a Winton block, then a 567, and maybe an Alco 539, dwelling on the technological innovations of each. The social history museum might interpret the same event by talking about the decline of the fireman's job, with interviews with workers, debates about so-called "featherbedding," etc.

Each approach can be done with high curatorial values, good interpretation, solid research, and all the other qualities that make for a good museum (in deference to Sandy, I won't conflate "good" and "professional").

However, each museum, while valid, might not appeal equally to the general public. I suspect many of us on this board would enjoy the first museum just fine, but that members of the public would enjoy the second--and that it would have the better chance of thriving and surviving.

eledbetter@rypn.org

A good friend and colleague at our Museum has impressed me with the importance of always answering the question "Why?" in designing an exhibit. In the case of the Alco and Winton example - on a technical basis describe why they are different in terms the average person might understand - fuel economy, weight, manufacturing costs, purchase price.

Wesley

wesleyNOSPAM@dctrolley.org

This really raises yet another interesting dimension. Why did people invest money to build railroads. Obviously to make money, but I wonder what kind of analytical process/thought process they used to figure what was and was not an attractive investment. Since risks were high, expected returns must have been high. When Huntington was looking for folks to invest in the CP, what did he tell them.

jbwest@att.net

> In the case of the Alco and Winton example - on
> a technical basis describe why they are
> different in terms the average person might
> understand - fuel economy, weight,
> manufacturing costs, purchase price.

Just to play devil's advocate for a moment: would your average 10-year-old-boy, or your average 35-year-old mom, really care?

To use Erik's words, what impact did that have on the lives of someone living in the 1950s and 1960s?

To put it another way: if you took your kids to a museum of telephone and computer technology, would they get thrilled about how OS/2 was a better operating system, but Windows won the marketing battle? Or that a No. 5 Crossbar Tandem was a lot more efficient than a Step-by-Step tandem switch, but that the 1AESS really blew them both away? Or that N2 Carrier sounded better than TD2 radio?

Probably not. It's only after you've been immersed in the minutiae for a while that such subtle difference matter.

I am reminded of my wife's answer when someone asked her what she thought of trains before we met: "I never thought about them." They were, at most, annoyances at grade crossings.

That's where 90% of the visitors to your "Museum" start. They have no idea that the railroad made America possible. That the Civil War was won by the railroads. That the Diesel saved railroading, not just a railroad, from bankruptcy.

And if they don't understand that, and you can't make them care, then the relative fuel economies of Winton and Alco will matter about as much as, oh, the difference between EISA and microchannel does to you.

Just a thought.

JAC

My comment was not intended to focus on what constitutes a good museum, but rather on our priorities with regard to things versus people. And a following post raises yet another largely ignored dimension, economics. In no way am I critical of any existing efforts. It's just fun to occasionally try to think outside the box.

The hugely popular Swiss Museum of Transportation has an interesting "tunnel of love" kind of ride that tells the story of the men who dug the Gottard Tunnel, where they came from, how they lived.

With regard to economics, histories tend to suggest so and so went off to London or New York to raise money....I have yet to hear any account of what Huntington, for example, told potential investors. You get pieces. They sometimes tried to reduce risk by making money up front on construction. But somewhere somehow they must have had some kind of thought process to evaluate when and how they would make money.

Just stirring the pot for fun. Hope I don't have to put my asbestos suit on.

jbwest@att.net

> I wonder if this is part of the dividing
> line between clubs and museums that was
> discussed a few weeks ago.

I have been to volunteer railroads that have listed more about the lives of volunteers in the group who were key to its purchase or restoration. Perhaps that is the key difference??

James

JamesKissinger@hotmail.com

The human aspect is what makes the approach of the Altoona Railroaders Memorial Museum unusual. The museum does have rolling stock, but when it reached a crossroad some years back, it chose to focus on telling the story of what it was like to live in a town of 16,000 railroad shopworkers -- a story that no other town in America can tell. For this reason, there are some aspects of the museum -- the railroad bar, for example -- that railfans are lukewarm about, but the public seems to love.

Dan Cupper
Harrisburg, PA

cupper@att.net