Re: PC: PCHS and Bi-Annual Vol. 1?

[Christian Axsiom <rcaxsiom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

	First of all, I would be interested in a PC historical society as well.
	Regarding Evan Ferarri's comment comment about being twenty and his
question being "stupid" brought something to mind that I've been thinking
about for a while.  I don't want to anger any older folks out there, but I
think at times there's a bit too much of an older slant to rail hobbies.  I
don't think Evan should have to apologize for being young.  I'm 26, so my
memories of PC diesels are only very faint recollections.  Nevertheless, I
like PC because I connect it with carefree childhood years -- just like
those guys who pine over steam locos and diesels in 1950s paint.  They
probably wouldn't guess that someone could view the early 70s as carefree
times (Of course they weren't carefree if you were in Vietnam, just like
the 50s weren't if you were, say, black and in Alabama.), but for me it was
all jade green boxcars, autoracks you could actually see the cars on,
waving to brakemen in cabooses, and playing with my Lionels. (I still like
Lionel, and I'd love to find a PC GP7, although I just bought a Chessie
GP20 and I can't really afford another locomotive right now.)
	So I wonder how many of us twentysomething railfans, PC or not, are out
there.  (Now here's my complaint ...) I here about people worrying over the
future of railroad hobbies, but have you noticed what mags like Classic Toy
Trains are doing lately?  There's no more Roland LaVoie saying you can
build a Lionel layout with used stuff on the cheap, and they rarely show
70s-era Lionel stuff.  They want you to spend hundreds of bucks on the
latest scale locomotive that you need a basement to even run.  That's fine
if you can afford it and you like that stuff, but just about everything
they feature is postwar stuff if it isn't new and expensive.  Then they do
articles on Lionel sales techniques or executives, and one recent layout
featured a guy who'd named his layout's big mountain after Rush Limbaugh.
Other featured layout owners are company presidents or even Frank Sinatra.
It all seems to me like its geared toward REALLY well-off, conservative,
middle-aged businessmen.  I know, these people are probably spending the
most money in the hobby right now, but I think there must be other people
of various ages and viewpoints out there.  I'd really love to see what some
younger people are doing -- perhaps some people who aren't so entrenched in
business or conservative politics -- people who might take the hobby into
the future when everyone else is gone.
	I know most of you on this list are probably not Lionel fans, and some may
not share my reading of what's going on, but I wondered what you all think.
 As PC fans, we seem to care about the eras other people don't, and letters
like Bob Rothrock's on March 5th seem to indicate that there are people who
grew up in the 50s who have a very different point of view than what we
typically here about.  I've really enjoyed reading the alternate history
stuff that's been on the listserv, and I think that material really
indicates that rail hobbies don't have to stagnate. They don't have to be
stuck in "untroubled" 1950s (or other) nostalgia.  I applaud any young
people who are interested in railroads and anyone who is into PC or
railroading in the 60s and 70s.  I hope our visibility and our ability to
get some people to better serve our interests will grow.  There are no
stupid questions, and no one should have to apologize for being younger.
	So, any other younger folks, younger-at-heart folks, Lionel fans
(especially early 70s), etc. out there in PCyberspace?

P.S.  The fact that this list is at smellycat.com gives me great hope for
the future.  All together now ..."WHAT ARE THEY FEEDING YOU???"

At 05:14 PM 4/6/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>Historical Society, I would love to be a memeber.
>
>Also i know this is probably a stupid question but I am only 20 and wasn't
>even born when the PC was around.
>
>I have PC Bi-Annual Vol. 2.  Is there a volume 1?
>If there is, how do I get it?
>
>Thanks,
>evan
>
>