Skip to main content

I assume the people who don't use the word toy looked in the dictionary and didn't think the word conveyed what they want to convey. No rationalization needed. No bright yellow highlighters necessary to dissect each section of the definition to eliminate the following:
a : something (such as a preoccupation) that is paltry or trifling
b : a literary or musical trifle or diversion
When they are trying to communicate with another person, there is no need to consider how the receiver might interpret or misinterpret any part of the definition of toy.

 

What you call my trains is not attached to my self worth in the least. However, insisting on telling other people that THEIR their stuff is toys and what it means to them, ANYTHING they own, is just rude. Whatever you want to call your own trains, toys, junk, squat, trifle, trinket, worthless, go for it. What works for one person does not work for another. 

You guys keep on bringing up that somene has a great sportscar and that they call it a toy. That does not phase me in the least. The word toy is an individual value judgement, different for everybody, and not necessarily based on an amount of money something cost. A $100 train could be worth the world to someone, not paltry, trifling, trinket, or bauble. And before someone brings up the price of a sports car, some things are valuable for other reasons.

 
 
 

This could be looked at a couple of different ways.

If we go by what it does, they are all toys, because they are specifically designed to provide us with entertainment. That alone can take many forms. Recreating railroad history is one of those forms.

Now, if we go by what it is, it can be a scale model, a hi-rail model (scale proportions but big flanges and/or couplers), or a tin plate train, which is an approximation of a real train, with varying degrees of realism.

Even back in the day, we had sheet metal locomotives and the scale Hudson, both made by Lionel.

jay jay posted:
Trainman2 posted:

It's kind of like the difference between "toy soldiers" and "army men".

Those are the same thing, but scale model military figures are something else indeed. 

In essence, yes. But toy soldiers were originally those die cast pieces that are now marketed by Britain's and they are quite detailed as well.

For me, the last word on this subject was made many years ago by an expert in the field.  I enjoy running a mix of pre-war, post-war, and modern trains.  At Christmas my usual practice then and now was to set up a huge layout on the living room floor and invite the neighbors and their kids over for a running session.  

  One evening a neighbor came over with her 7 year old daughter.  As we walked into the living room the young lady came to an abrupt halt, gasped, and said in a shocked/delighted voice, "It's toys!  It's a WHOLE ROOM full of toys!"  Her mother, who was cognizant of the sensitivity that some people have toward the word "toy" quickly said, "No dear, these are scale models."  To which I replied, " No, she's right.  It is a whole room full of toys and I'm just the oldest kid on the block." 

Last edited by Robert S. Butler

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×