Subject:
|
Re: Pic: New Green Building
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains.org
|
Date:
|
Mon, 16 Apr 2001 02:08:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
718 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.trains.org, John Neal writes:
>
>
> Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> > In lugnet.trains.org, John Neal writes:
> > > But whether or not my structures end up as a part of the layout or not
> > > isn't my concern. They all will fit in nicely on my home layout:-)
> >
> > ??
> >
> > Why the talk, even in jest, of starting letter writing campaigns, etc., then??
>
> Well, it is more of a philosophical argument, really. I am coming
> from more of a
> model railroading POV, where buildings are merely facades and it's all about
> *external* appearances. Then there are those in the club who
> build a building,
> completely detail the inside of it, and close it up so that it will never be
> seen. I'm not against detailing interiors, but am more interested in
> detailing
> the exteriors. I would rather finish all the exteriors and *then* move to
> detailing the interiors.
>
> Yeah, all the little minifig details are cool and everything, but to say that
> large, detailed (but minifigless) buildings are invalid is wrong IMO.
> Maybe in an ideal world you have both, but I don't have the time or
> energy to do
> it. And as it is, I am (again) a lone voice in the wilderness.
>
> But as I finish them, I will let my buildings speak for themselves
Ah, excellent, a philosophical argment. Recall, if you will, that I've been
getting TRAINS since 1970, and it was only recently that I let my Model
Railroader subscription, started in 1969, lapse. So I'll see your "model
railroading background", and raise you, you're holding a busted flush.
First, let me carefully say... in what is about to follow *there is NO right
answer*... except the answer that you, dear reader, decide to choose for you
or your club, for your own good and sufficient reasons, because it's about
fun, after all, not fitting preconcieved notions.
The crux of this argument turns on what the basic purpose of the layout is...
is it a scene in its own right and the trains are secondary (which, if
you'll recall, is how some train clubs view things, they are primarily town
layouts that happen to have trains... WAMALTC and MICLTC, for example, seem
to fit this)?
Or is the layout, as famous pioneering model railroader Frank Ellison said,
"a stage that serves as backdrop to showcase the primary actors, the trains"?
Frank was a huge advocate of selective compression, of using scene dividers
to "stage" trains from one scene to the next, of using shorter trains than
prototypical in order to fit the trains to the available layout, of using
fast clocks, train waybills, dispatchers with headsets and a bunch of other
stuff to make operation the focus. (the latter few are not always feasible
or appropriate for shows but can make club operating sessions huge fun)
If you take that latter approach, you will advocate leaving building
interiors out unless they somehow add to the scene as a whole. As you do.
But more importantly, you will advocate selective compression, reducing a
building to the merest sliver that still conveys the essential message of
why the building is placed there. And that you do not do.
So you've got some conflicts to work out to resolve what you say, you are
speaking at cross purposes to yourself.
Another facet of the hobby to draw parallels from is the creation of models
*as models* in their own right. If you do that, you will WANT to add detail,
even if no one but you knows it is there (consider Spamcake diner, which I
saw in the flesh, week before last, It has details that no one would see
were it in place on a layout... lots of them).
But your focus then is NOT the show or operation, it is the craftsmanship of
creating a highly detailed model. And this faction of modelers, rather than
focusing on large operable layouts, focuses on winning craftsman
competitions... something we, in this subhobby don't have much of (yet...
but witness the awesome models submitted to the recent Town contest... so
there is an interest there, one I would like to see nurtured).
Of course it's possible to do both but one has to be clear about purpose or
one risks muddying one's message.
Food for thought.
PS, the sackcloth and ashes ("they're all persecuting me", "I am a voice in
the wilderness", etc) schtick is a bit overdone, but this being the vernal
equinox celebratory Sunday (1), I guess I can see it... :-)
I hope other people will choose to chime in about this, it is always
interesting to get more than two voices. But those that say "I just want to
hang back, not think about the Zen of it, and just build"... that's OK too.
Remember it is about having fun.
1 - you know, the holiday the Christians appropriated to be Easter... :-)
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Pic: New Green Building
|
| (...) Perhaps one could argue that it's all about *LEGO*. When push comes to shove, we at the GMLTC don't push *trains* necessarily, but the concept of *LEGO*-- creativity, etc. Most of us were fans of the brick first. So whether dad is inspired by (...) (24 years ago, 16-Apr-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Pic: New Green Building
|
| (...) Well, it is more of a philosophical argument, really. I am coming from more of a model railroading POV, where buildings are merely facades and it's all about *external* appearances. Then there are those in the club who build a building, (...) (24 years ago, 16-Apr-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
45 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
