The Railway Series [Thomas the Tank Engine] (and TV spin-offs)

[py_megapixel]

Many people's primary exposure to trains - especially if they have (or are) young children - will be through the medium of the Rev. W Awdry's Railway Series, and the two TV adaptations, Thomas the Tank Engine - filmed in a studio on a model railway - and Thomas & Friends - produced using Computer Generated Imagery (CGI) [*].

I've often wondered, quite simply - as a rail enthusiast, or just in general, what do you think of these series?

I might add a poll if I get lots of similar answers...

[*] They are technically the same TV programme, but they are rather different in nature, and the branding changed with the switch to CGI, so they are counted as separate by many.

 

[Skittle]

If it helps and what I find quite curious is the wee guy is absolutely in love with trains, today he even blew a kiss and promised that he'd see the leaving train tomorrow. He loves them.

Can I get him to watch Thomas the Tank? Nope. Won't entertain it. He has a little Thomas Tank toy and he calls it train. If I say Thomas, the stare - the stare if looks could kill I'd be dust and he will firmly say "train."

Personally I loved it when I was wee, who doesn't love the fat controller.

 

[Ianno87]

It's a great show for capturing Kids' imagination.

It's definitely moved with the times, from the Ringo Starr-narrated models to the modern animation with songs. The diversity of the engines is markedly improved (the original series were basically all white British males with the few female characters relegated to carriages - Daisy the railcar being the sole exception).

Only thing that grates is that the modern version has thrown the adherence to real railway operations out the window that the early series / books stayed true to.

 

[Calthrop]

For self -- born 1948, in a country town where three secondary-main-lines intersected, involving umpteen level crossings; and with everything then, steam -- guaranteeing for me, terminal railway-mania (of that era) from infancy: my relatively sympathetic and understanding parents got me some of the earlier of the "Thomas" books. I recall my mother's narrating to very-young me, from the book, the tale of the goods train which got into some kind of trouble, involving a long stop mid-section -- in the course of which the guard lost his cap, which a goat subsequently ate for its tea. I was even in infancy, extremely serious about railways and their vital economic and social role -- the mishap-and-guard-and-cap thing had me bursting into tears. Which had my parents thinking -- very understandably -- "to heck with this for a game of soldiers"; and purveying to me nothing henceforth, from the Reverend's books.

 

[JohnMcL7]

I remember being read the books as a child but not sure how much I watched the TV series, I remembered my younger brothers watching it endlessly on video tape and while I liked the model work I'm not sure if that endeared me to trains since it was heavily steam based and I don't have much interest in steam engines. What I do remember as a child starting off my interest in trains was going to the station and seeing the bike 37's and 47's rumbling in and out which is something that's not really gone away.

 

[Ashley Hill]

I always wondered whatever happened to Duck the GWR pannier tank? He didn't feature in the "Friends" series and was replaced with Emily! Diesels also appeared in the later original books but the likes of BoCo and D7101 I believe never made it to the telly.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

I love the stories still

Plusminus, plus:
Good stories for grownups too
The Watercress Line built a full-size 'Thomas Engine', brought in a lot of cash that helped "serious" projects

Minus:
Apparently many children have not used other trains, and believe that steam is normal
Even the MHR with excellent connections at Alton generates a lot of road traffic
..
Whatabout clergypersons so often being interested in railways?

 

[Ianno87]

I always wondered whatever happened to Duck the GWR pannier tank? He didn't feature in the "Friends" series and was replaced with Emily! Diesels also appeared in the later original books but the likes of BoCo and D7101 I believe never made it to the telly.

He does make sporadic appearances in the later series: See list at https://ttte.fandom.com/wiki/Duck

Some of the "traditional" characters are put into the background more recently in favour of more diverse characters.

Thomas, for example, is less frequently shown pulling Annie and Clarabel, more often trucks and other coaches instead.

 

[krus_aragon]

Only thing that grates is that the modern version has thrown the adherence to real railway operations out the window that the early series / books stayed true to.

This is my greatest issue with the modern episodes, too. (And silly promos that have engines dramatically leaping off the rails at the crest of a hill, with nary the thought about derailment.)

Our kids have definitely engaged with Thomas and friends as characters. They've got a general interest in trains too, from playing with a brio set, visiting the odd narrow gauge line, and visiting the steam charters when they pull in to Llandudno Jn. The eldest has a compendium of Awdry's stories at her grandparents' house, and a weekly routine of one story before bedtime.

We prefer to put the older, non-CGI TV episodes on for them, but we do watch the modern CGI ones in Welsh (on S4C) because the only copies we've found of the older ones are VHS captures: they haven't been re-released on DVD like the English ones.

The current calamity is that our kids have now discovered Chuggington since it popped up on the Iplayer this week. *shudder* The wife and I need a crisis meeting this weekend to work out our response.

 

[Ashley Hill]

I've tried getting my partners nephew into railways,firstly with my old favourite Chigley and then Thomas. Alas it was all for nothing,so far! The next thing will be a visit to a diesel gala.

 

[hst43102]

I used to love the Thomas books as a young child (mid-2000's). I had a collection of the new stories, and a big book of the original Awdry tales. I absolutely loved the original stories, but the new ones were frankly a bit rubbish - in no way representative of how a railway is run [everything is a "special delivery" or "secret cargo"], and I had no interest the locomotives' personal lives! I also don't see the point in the "diversity" of the series - everyone knows Thomas, Percy, Gordon etc, but I don't think I can name any of the female engines now!

 

[Calthrop]

The diversity of the engines is markedly improved (the original series were basically all white British males with the few female characters relegated to carriages - Daisy the railcar being the sole exception).

My instinctive reaction to drives for "political correctness" (this stuff comes, one feels, essentially "from a good place"): is probably reprehensible -- there tends to be aroused in me, an evil desire to be as un-PC as possible... It has long been well-known that ardent feminists have considerable issues with the Railway Series. Concerning this, I'm unable to suppress an inner snigger at misogynistic old W.A.'s attempting a nod to the gentle sex, by bringing Daisy the railcar into his railway's fleet: but making a botch of it, with his portrayal of her as a bit of a neurotic, hypochondriacal pain in the neck -- forever yakking on about how she is highly-sprung; and about this, that and the other thing, being bad for her swerves...

Whatabout clergypersons so often being interested in railways?

In his The End of the Line, Bryan Morgan -- which work and author I tend a bit to, railway-wise, regard as respectively Gospel and apostle -- muses: "There is a tendency, I think, for British railway enthusiasm to be strongest in those professions which themselves contain a balance of the formal and the emotional -- music, teaching, the Church, the writing of detective stories..." (which last, is what Morgan himself did when he wasn't "on the grice") -- well, it's a stray thought, anyway, with a bearing on the "clerical railfan" phenomenon.

 

[Ianno87]

My instinctive reaction to drives for "political correctness" (this stuff comes, one feels, essentially "from a good place"): is probably reprehensible -- there tends to be aroused in me, an evil desire to be as un-PC as possible... It has long been well-known that ardent feminists have considerable issues with the Railway Series.

The original were of their time, but hardly an advert for railways as an industry with a diverse workforce - you don't need to even be close to an "ardent feminist" to see that today. Basically telling a generation of girls "Railways are for boys".

Even down to genderising the roles of the people who worked on the railway - referring to "signalman", "workmen" etc.

Not the only show of it's time to suffer from this - my wife has an old video of The Sooty Show from the 1980s, where Matthew(?) Corbett gets the kids in the audience to mime "boy jobs" (racing driver) and "girl jobs" (typist). Unbelievable in hindsight with a modern head on.

 

[Taunton]

the original series were basically all white British males

Probably in a similar proportion to the members of this website then ...

 

[hst43102]

The original were of their time, but hardly an advert for railways as an industry with a diverse workforce - you don't need to even be close to an "ardent feminist" to see that today. Basically telling a generation of girls "Railways are for boys".

Even down to genderising the roles of the people who worked on the railway - referring to "signalman", "workmen" etc.

I would strongly disagree with this. At the time, as now, railways were run predominantly by men. Awdry used the correct railway terms for the workers, as they were at the time. I personally think that everyone should be free to choose what career they want - not have all this fuss about tearing down traditional roles. There's lots of calls to have a 50/50 gender split in banking, media, engineering, science etc, why is there no issue about the fact that there are hardly any male primary school teachers, nurses, psychologists etc?
/rant over

 

[Ianno87]

I would strongly disagree with this. At the time, as now, railways were run predominantly by men. Awdry used the correct railway terms for the workers, as they were at the time. I personally think that everyone should be free to choose what career they want - not have all this fuss about tearing down traditional roles. There's lots of calls to have a 50/50 gender split in banking, media, engineering, science etc, why is there no issue about the fact that there are hardly any male primary school teachers, nurses, psychologists etc?
/rant over

Because the best railway workforce is a diverse one. Diversify gender, race, religion etc. and by extension you diversify into a bigger pool of skills and capabilities

Note: I've never said anything about needing to have a completely arbitrary 50/50 gender split (plus non-binary genders).

What I'm concerned about is highly capable non-male potential recruits being deterred because it's "for men", thus stopping equalising the balance. But this is *never* about arbitrary box-ticking targets.

 

[pdeaves]

The way things are now (compared to when the original Thomas stories were written), who says Thomas has to be a boy's name? It's as diverse as you want it to be.

 

[Ianno87]

The way things are now (compared to when the original Thomas stories were written), who says Thomas has to be a boy's name? It's as diverse as you want it to be.

You're quite right - we *presume* Thomas identifies as male.

 

[py_megapixel]

The way things are now (compared to when the original Thomas stories were written), who says Thomas has to be a boy's name? It's as diverse as you want it to be.

You're quite right - we *presume* Thomas identifies as male.

This does overlook that (s)he has a male voice actor though

 

[Ianno87]

This does overlook that (s)he has a male voice actor though

Who in the original series also narrates Daisy, Annie, and Clarabel's voices. ("Oh, he's dreadfully rude, I feel quite ashamed!")

In the modern series, engines like Emily are voiced by females.

 

[hst43102]

Because the best railway workforce is a diverse one. Diversify gender, race, religion etc. and by extension you diversify into a bigger pool of skills and capabilities

Absolutely.

Note: I've never said anything about needing to have a completely arbitrary 50/50 gender split (plus non-binary genders).

Sorry about that, I went completely off track! Not you specifically but a lot of folk in the media seem to think that a 50/50 split is the only way forward.

What I'm concerned about is highly capable non-male potential recruits being deterred because it's "for men", thus stopping equalising the balance. But this is *never* about arbitrary box-ticking targets.

I would agree with you there - but in many cases it does seem to be about ticking boxes. The other danger is that some men might not consider a career in the railways due to it being labelled as a area in need of diversity. I think most members on here would agree that interest in the railways is typically found in males!

 

[py_megapixel]

Who in the original series also narrates Daisy, Annie, and Clarabel's voices. ("Oh, he's dreadfully rude, I feel quite ashamed!")

That's interesting, I didn't kow that.

 

[SargeNpton]

Who in the original series also narrates Daisy, Annie, and Clarabel's voices. ("Oh, he's dreadfully rude, I feel quite ashamed!")

In the modern series, engines like Emily are voiced by females.

Well, generally, a narrator will do all the voices. Subtle difference to a cast of actors doing a voiceover.

 

[Ianno87]

Well, generally, a narrator will do all the voices. Subtle difference to a cast of actors doing a voiceover.

Thomas is a bit odd in the narrator doing the voices.

Other shows like Peppa Pig, Duggee and The Teletubbies do basic narration to set the scene (or break the 4th wall with the characters) with seperate voice actors for the actual characters.

 

[MotCO]

I always found it strange that someone of Ringo Starr's star status would want to do the original voice over. Is he a railway fan, or what was his reasons for doing so, (apart from the obvious one of money!)?

The other vicar/railway connection I recall is in the Titchfield Thunderbolt, where one of the main proponents for reinstating the railway is a vicar.

With regard to diversity, I've always supported the notion of best person for the job, but accept that sometimes you need to encourage people from certain backgrounds (or sex) to apply.

 

[Peter C]

The other vicar/railway connection I recall is in the Titchfield Thunderbolt, where one of the main proponents for reinstating the railway is a vicar.

This makes at least three:

-Peter

 

[martin2345uk]

I definitely blame Thomas for making me want to be a train driver!

 

[Calthrop]

This makes at least three:

-Peter

And Bishop Eric Treacy; Canon Roger Lloyd; Rev. A.V.W. Mace (who wrote delightful articles in the Railway Magazine about his 1950s rail travels); and RailUKForums' own Roger Farnworth...

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

My favourite story is where a big *male* engine bleats and bleats about the rain, he is afraid his beautiful paint may be blemished. So he is bricked up inside an tunnel for years
I understand even this episode has some relation to reality

 

[Ianno87]

My favourite story is where a big *male* engine bleats and bleats about the rain, he is afraid his beautiful paint may be blemished. So he is bricked up inside an tunnel for years
I understand even this episode has some relation to reality

"Thomas & Henry the Massive Snowflake"