Traditionalists, Purists... A Quesion... ?

[The Anonymous Bard]

OK… one question is still niggling away at me.

 

For those that consider themselves purists, traditionalists or whatever they wish to label themselves as with their “true to original drawing” shells and “vintage” engines, exactly how pure are you?

 

Surely a true purist/traditionalist would have nothing other than a horse drawn boat… no motor conversion or vintage engine and where would that leave you?

 

An opinion of yourselves that rides higher in the sky than the pigs which circle awaiting their particular landing time?

 

Paying a fortune for straw and feeding a passion that you cannot devote the time to?

 

I suspect, with the very odd exception, no purer than the modern day cruiser or semi-trad with “pram hood”!

 

After all… as a serious question, surely those that consider themselves purists due to the fact that they have a boatman’s cabin and “vintage” engine resplendent in its own setting are settling on an era of convenience that has been chosen in conjunction with what suits their particular lifestyle and not traced back to the actual pure origins of boat transport as we refer to as narrowboats?

 

So, mop handle wielding twizzlers… what is it?

 

Do we re-phrase the purists as “a certain age of boat transport era-ists who are so, through a matter of convenience because that period of time suits them, no more purer than a bag of pork scratchings to a vegetarian“ or does history really extend beyond Tom Rolt and Cressy?

 

Is your purism really your own personal discovery of boat transportation and not pure at all but just a deluded fantasy which you insist on living out based on an idealistic (to you) era, or is it really traced back to its roots in this context, and would you still consider yourselves a purist/traditionalists considering?

[kitman]

Someone rubbed you up the wrong way today?

[Québec]

Light blue paper - with a match of course, not a cigarette lighter - and stand well back.

 

Get your olde popcorne here!

[luctor et emergo]

Surely, the question is, did Adam wear a bowler hat?

[The Anonymous Bard]

Nothing more than a passive (a-herm) question which sports an interesting answer...

[carlt]

"As built" does not have to be horse drawn.

 

It would be wrong, from an authenticity point of view, to pull a butty round, with a horse. They were built to be dragged around by a motor.

 

All surviving horse boats, however, have at some time in their working lives been pulled by a motor so, from a purists point of view, buttying is part of their working history.

 

Personally I think you can do what you want, with your own boat, but I reserve the right to have an opinion, about the end result.

[luctor et emergo]

As to answer your question, when I stand on the front half of my boat, I feel justifyably like a traditional purist. However, when I stand on the 1980's steel counter, I deserve all the scorn I get, and hang my head in shame.

[The Anonymous Bard]

"As built" does not have to be horse drawn.

 

It would be wrong, from an authenticity point of view, to pull a butty round, with a horse. They were built to be dragged around by a motor.

 

All surviving horse boats, however, have at some time in their working lives been pulled by a motor so, from a purists point of view, buttying is part of their working history.

 

Personally I think you can do what you want, with your own boat, but I reserve the right to have an opinion, about the end result.

 

It does if you want to go back to origin in the context of which the question was asked.

 

But we are talking about the pure origins of narrowboats in this context, not buttys in particular.

 

Most motors which towed buttys in the early days were originally pre-motor conversions that were horse drawn?

 

"As built" does not have to be horse drawn.

 

Where the hell did "as built" come from?

 

And noticabely no reply from the "purists" as yet... ?

[RLWP]

It's an unusual venue for it, but

 

Popcorn, deckchairs, ice-cream

 

Richard

[Kez]

It does if you want to go back to origin in the context of which the question was asked.

 

But we are talking about the pure origins of narrowboats in this context, not buttys in particular.

 

Most motors which towed buttys in the early days were originally pre-motor conversions that were horse drawn?

 

 

The horse boat conversions were trials and experiments of steam boats, later followed by the motor boat tests, and before the steady motor-butty arrangement. Most ended up on the scrap heap as a bad job anyway though. By the time everyone had got to grips of the idea of a motor boat, it was New Toy Syndrome with the companies who rushed off to the builders to get in on the act

Edited April 12, 2011 by Kez

[The Anonymous Bard]

The horse boat conversions were trials and experiments of steam boats, later followed by the motor boat tests, and before the steady motor-butty arrangement. Most ended up on the scrap heap as a bad job anyway though. By the time everyone had got to grips of the idea of a motor boat, it was New Toy Syndrome with the companies who rushed off to the builders to get in on the act

 

So the original question stands...

[RLWP]

So the original question stands...

 

You're going to have to restate the original question in a way that can be easily understood.

 

If I had a replica of a Harland and Wolf GU Motor built it would be exactly to the original drawings, and would have a motor.

 

What's your point exactly?

 

Richard

Edited April 12, 2011 by RLWP

[The Anonymous Bard]

You're going to have to restate the original question in a way that can be easily understood.

 

If I had a replica of a Harland and Wolf GU Motor built it would be exactly to the original drawings, and would have a motor.

 

What's your point exactly?

 

Richard

 

Simply the pure origins of boat freight transport, pre-motor and simply pure of mechanical propulsion engineering... the origins.

[pete harrison]

 

Most motors which towed buttys in the early days were originally pre-motor conversions that were horse drawn?

 

 

A popular misconception. I reckon for every motor converted from a horse boat pre-1920 I could name at least 3 purpose built counter sterned motors. The conversion of horse boats / buttys to motors became popular in the 1930's, although clearly there were a few converted earlier.

[carlt]

It does if you want to go back to origin in the context of which the question was asked.

 

But we are talking about the pure origins of narrowboats in this context, not buttys in particular.

 

Most motors which towed buttys in the early days were originally pre-motor conversions that were horse drawn?

 

Where the hell did "as built" come from?

 

And noticabely no reply from the "purists" as yet... ?

Actually I regard myself as an enthusiast and, if you like, "purist" though, from your tone, it would seem to be being used a derogatory term.

 

If you want to be "purer" than "as built" then, surely, a concours Rolls Royce such as this...

...should be dismantled and rebuilt as a horse and cart.

 

I don't actually believe the "purists" that you're having a pop at actually exist, except with a very few people who want to keep horsedrawn boating alive.

 

Their problem is that there are so few surviving horse boats that they have to use butties, instead.

Edited April 12, 2011 by carlt

[pete harrison]

The horse boat conversions were trials and experiments of steam boats, later followed by the motor boat tests, and before the steady motor-butty arrangement. Most ended up on the scrap heap as a bad job anyway though. By the time everyone had got to grips of the idea of a motor boat, it was New Toy Syndrome with the companies who rushed off to the builders to get in on the act

 

I am certain that this is not historically correct.

[Speedwheel]

Surely a true purist/traditionalist would have nothing other than a horse drawn boat

 

Many were not horse drawn but people drawn. Horses were expensive, people were not.

Edited April 12, 2011 by Speedwheel

[The Anonymous Bard]

Actually I regard myself as an enthusiast and, if you like, "purist" though, from your tone, it would seem to be being used a derogatory term.

 

If you want to be "purer" than "as built" then, surely, a concours Rolls Royce such as this...

...should be dismantled and rebuilt as a horse and cart.

 

I don't actually believe the "purists" that you're having a pop at actually exist, except with a very few people who want to keep horsedrawn boating alive.

 

Their problem is that there are so few surviving horse boats that they have to use butties, instead.

 

Oh please...

 

A popular misconception. I reckon for every motor converted from a horse boat pre-1920 I could name at least 3 purpose built counter sterned motors. The conversion of horse boats / buttys to motors became popular in the 1930's, although clearly there were a few converted earlier.

 

So... the first narrowbaots were horse (people) drawn craft, back to the original question?

[Speedwheel]

Anyone have a spare can? Mine appears to be empty.

 

[RLWP]

Simply the pure origins of boat freight transport, pre-motor and simply pure of mechanical propulsion engineering... the origins.

 

That isn't a question. It might be supporting aspects of a question.

 

What's your question?

 

Richard

[carlt]

Oh please...

Oh please what?

 

Surely a motoring "purist" would like to see the Phantom preserved "as built" yet your fanciful kind of "purist" would sneer at it as being inferior to a horse drawn vehicle.

 

I don't actually believe you understand what you are actually asking.

 

There are no "purists" (by your definition) here to answer your question, merely enthusiasts that believe each type of working boat has its own place in history and should be preserved.

[pete harrison]

OK… one question is still niggling away at me.

 

For those that consider themselves purists, traditionalists or whatever they wish to label themselves as with their “true to original drawing” shells and “vintage” engines, exactly how pure are you?

 

 

It has always struck me that the 'purists' are usually snobs who assume their modern shell, complete with back cabin and vintage engine, makes them better than everybody else. I do not think these 'purists' should be confused with 'enthusiasts' who try to maintain / restore their former carrying boats with some historical sympathy.

[luctor et emergo]

Well, if you want to go back to the origin, you probably talk hollowed out tree trunk?

Or maybe a coracle, or is that to modern?

[The Anonymous Bard]

That isn't a question. It might be supporting aspects of a question.

 

What's your question?

 

Richard

 

Simple enough... refer to post one?

 

It takes multiple factors into consideration but seems straight forward enough to me, pre-motor narrowboats being the source of purism and true traditionalism as opposed to how some see it today.

[PhilR]

 

So... the first narrowbaots were horse (people) drawn craft, back to the original question?

 

Seeing that you started the thread, what is your own opinion and ....err... what is the question?

 

Is it <quote> An opinion of yourselves that rides higher in the sky than the pigs which circle awaiting their particular landing time? <unquote> or is that from The Merchant of Venice, Comedy of Errors or Love's Labours Lost? ........... or have you got hold of a really nice single malt tonight?