All Hail John Allen!

[SpaceMouse]

Andre,

I understand why a person like Allen could get notoriety. Of Whit Towers, Paul Larson, Jack Work, Gib Kennedy, Doug Smith, Mel Thornburgh and even Linn Westcott, Wescott is the only name I recognize and I've seen some of his work. The others are just names.

Can anyone post example of their work or at least explain their claim to fame?

[Texas Zepher]

QUOTE: Originally posted by marknewton
I build just about everything from scratch now, so having no RTR Big Boys wouldn't bother me one bit.

I think you missed the bigger picture, I used Big Boys as the extreme example. The GP market would dry up too as well as the track market to run them on etc.... And beside when I think of things I try to think of other people too not just my own personal situation.

QUOTE: You reckon a train every 30 minutes is busy? Jeez, where I come from that'd be the frequency in middle of the night on a public holiday.

I don't reckon I know. I've spent hours by the tracks before with ZERO trains.

QUOTE: Still, just because you're easily bored doesn't make my choices about what I model any less valid.

I didn't say it was invalid, and I don't think anyone else really has either. They were surprised by it and maybe even incredulous. I was just responding to your question. You always seem to take peoples responses to your questions as a person affront, when many of those same people have said that your style just wasn't right for them. And also, I am NOT easily bored. I was saying that if I choose a prototypical place to model in the manner you have suggested it would be boring for anyone. Assuming one could be intersted in light-rail, even our local light rail system only has a train each direction every 20 minutes. Get a train from staging, run it through the staging. Stop, pick up passengers, return to station. Repeat 20 minutes later. Woud that keep you interested in operating?

[andrechapelon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE

Chip,Search MRs of the 50/60s you will see that the hobby did not revolve around JA..You are making John something he wasn't.
Mark is quite correct.

Now,my friend how about the other greats of that era? Surely you don't think John was above them?

Again,Model railroading isn't a art form and never was and I'll like to hang the slob that started that crap.

Like who? And why haven't their names survived like Allen's did? Maybe you could scan some of thier works and post them. It also help if you coached me in what made them greater than Allen. When you speak in broad generalities you tell me nothing at all. Who are you talking about and what did they do? And why should I take the time to research them?

Chip, one of the reasons Allen is still well known is because a lot of us who grew up in the 50's and 60's are very familiar with his work, in part because because of the Varney ads that appeared in MR in the late 50's and the fact that Allen wrote quite a few articles for MR. Then there's the fact that Linn Westcott wrote an entire book about Allen. You can't say that for any other model railroader.

Have there been other greats? Whit Towers, Paul Larson, Jack Work, Gib Kennedy, Doug Smith, Mel Thornburgh and even Linn Westcott himself come to mind. However, none of these was as profilic an author as Allen, in part because Allen was the only one who could devote full time to the hobby. Everybody else had a day job. Granted both Paul Larson and Linn Westcott did stints as MR's editor, but that's not the same as having all that free time to work on one's own layout and write about it.

I'm not trying to denigrate John Allen. Far from it. I admire his work even though I wouldn't want to emulate it. I do consider him one of the greats. I even get a kick out of his whimsy (the "Sorefeetz brothers", the hanging of a diesel salesman from a bridge, the stegosaurus switcher, etc.). I think, however, that it's a bit much to deify John Allen.

Andre

[SpaceMouse]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE

Chip,Search MRs of the 50/60s you will see that the hobby did not revolve around JA..You are making John something he wasn't.
Mark is quite correct.

Now,my friend how about the other greats of that era? Surely you don't think John was above them?

Again,Model railroading isn't a art form and never was and I'll like to hang the slob that started that crap.

Like who? And why haven't their names survived like Allen's did? Maybe you could scan some of thier works and post them. It also help if you coached me in what made them greater than Allen. When you speak in broad generalities you tell me nothing at all. Who are you talking about and what did they do? And why should I take the time to research them?

[selector]

All mimickry is art. Modeling is mimickry. Ergo...(must I spell it out?)

[BRAKIE]

Chip,Search MRs of the 50/60s you will see that the hobby did not revolve around JA..You are making John something he wasn't.
Mark is quite correct.

Now,my friend how about the other greats of that era? Surely you don't think John was above them?

Again,Model railroading isn't a art form and never was and I'll like to hang the slob that started that crap.

[Anonymous]

Is Model railroading not a three "D" art form. As in any art work some people will like what you do and others will dispise it. Actually my railroad is for my enjoyment, and I will build it and run it my way for it is my escape mechanism from reality. I think that John Allen and all others have done the same. There work has inspired meny model railroaders whether you like the work or not it has made an inpression on you and that is all that was intended.
Les

[sundayniagara]

The John Allen book was published when Linn Westcott was the MR Editor and Al Kalmbach was still alive. Those of you who weren't yet born, or who aren't old enough to remember should purchase and read some of the MR's from that era. The doubting Thomases among you just might form a different opinion.
Mark

[SpaceMouse]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE

Chip,Scratch building a structure is mere child's play compared to the guys that was scratch building locomotives! John,was NOT the only modeler showing us how to scratch build structures.
I just can't see all the hoopla over John when there were others just as important and was far better modelers then John..John didn't do any that wasn't done before his time even his great G&D started as a 4x8 foot layout..I know he wasn't the first in anything other then floor to ceiling scenery.In order to bring this into respective even today's "experts" had to be shown and taught.Same as JA..


Mark is correct..Wasn't for MR John would have been just another faceless modeler.

Frank Lloyd Wright did not do anything new. People have been building houses for millinia. He just did it so that people took notice. Allen brought us vision and scope beyond what the other modelers did. If not, MR would have picked up on them.

[MidlandPacific]

It seems rather tediously obvious at this point that John Allen was well known because of MR - although the independent management of Railroad Model Craftsman and the now-defunct HO Monthly and the NMRA all promoted him, too.

Why? Because people wanted it. Yes, there were undoubtedly those who disliked him. We have ample evidence of that here. But MR's circulation doubled under Linn Westcott's editorial guidance. It seems unlikely that Westcott and Co. DIDN'T know what people wanted. Mark has it exactly backward: MR didn't foist JA on an uninterested and hostile audience: it gave them what they wanted.

[SpaceMouse]

QUOTE: Originally posted by marknewton

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

While I admire you for taking the bull by the horns and scratch building all your structures, etc. Scratch building today is not the same as scratch building a few years ago. But it took the John Allens to show what scratch building could be so that people like you would have it easy.

What utter rubbish. I'd been scratch building for years before I saw any of Allen's work. How do you reckon that he made it easy for people like me?

There is a story about Christopher Columbus where a man claimed that many people had sailed to the new world and that anyone could do it. Christopher Columbus took and egg, handed it to the man, and told him to stand it on end. When the man couldn't Chris took the egg smashed the end and it stood. To which the man said. "Shoot, anyone can do that.

Chris said, "Yes, but it took someone to show you how."

Scratch building has gone commercial and there are things like pre-made windows etc. available to you. All of these came form the scratch building efforts of the early modelers. Sure you may have done it before you saw Allen's work, but that doesn't mean that without Allen's and other's contributions you would have even the refined materials to work with let alone the tools and techniques.

QUOTE:

QUOTE: Just like you might not like Andy Warhol's Campbell's Soup Cans, but they stood the art world on it's ear and changed the course of art. Allen did that as well.

Again, that's merely your opinion, not fact. What evidence do you have to support that claim?

There is a saying that condemnation without investigation is the height of arrogance. My wife is an expert in the field, holding an MFA from UCLA in art. She has been an Art Historian for the Getty Museum. At any rate, she has explained to me how Warhol's work has effected the art community and the course of art theory. While I retained the fact of it, I did not retain the how of it. But in truth, if I did take the time to explain it would you 1) understand it or 2) care.

However, my wife is right here, if you do require the explanation I could ask her to lay it out for you.

QUOTE:

QUOTE: And while you can argue that Allen was only know because of his publication--that's just the way it is.

No, I'll argue that Allen enjoys a reputation greater than he deserves because of MR's editorial policies.

What's the difference?

[BRAKIE]

Chip,Scratch building a structure is mere child's play compared to the guys that was scratch building locomotives! John,was NOT the only modeler showing us how to scratch build structures.
I just can't see all the hoopla over John when there were others just as important and was far better modelers then John..John didn't do any that wasn't done before his time even his great G&D started as a 4x8 foot layout..I know he wasn't the first in anything other then floor to ceiling scenery.In order to bring this into respective even today's "experts" had to be shown and taught.Same as JA..


Mark is correct..Wasn't for MR John would have been just another faceless modeler.

[marknewton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

While I admire you for taking the bull by the horns and scratch building all your structures, etc. Scratch building today is not the same as scratch building a few years ago. But it took the John Allens to show what scratch building could be so that people like you would have it easy.

What utter rubbish. I'd been scratchbuilding for years before I saw any of Allen's work. How do you reckon that he made it easy for people like me?

QUOTE: Just like you might not like Andy Warhol's Campbell's Soup Cans, but they stood the art world on it's ear and changed the course of art. Allen did that as well.

Again, that's merely your opinion, not fact. What evidence do you have to support that claim?

QUOTE: And while you can argue that Allen was only know because of his publication--that's just the way it is.

No, I'll argue that Allen enjoys a reputation greater than he deserves because of MR's editorial policies.

[MidlandPacific]

Well, since the non-rude definition of "obtuse" is "rounded at the free end," the same term MIGHT be applicable!

[SpaceMouse]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rripperger

calling Chip "obtuse"

MY wife uses other adjectives and points to the exercycle.

[marknewton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

I guess I better start looking for another poopy.

Whoosh! Straight through to the keeper! [:)]

It's poppy, BTW.

[MidlandPacific]

Mark,

By "ungracious," I was referring to some of your remarks about the people on this thread. You furthered the impression by calling Chip "obtuse" and by making a string of impolite generalizations about Americans.

[dwRavenstar]

newton-

It's interesting that you placed yourself in the more negative description that I'd offered. Considering that you've taken everything that anyone has mentioned re the value of rigid realistic representation vs artistic freelancing personally and felt compelled to react rather than respond might provide a clue as to your self-placement.

Personally, I am building a realistic scene that incorporates a functioning railroad but I am gladly allowing myself the freedom of self-expression and humour in that effort. I must have that freedom available because I have yet to meet anyone who wouldn't change something about their home, yard, garden or neighborhood if they had the finances and leeway to do so. What that means (to me) is that while I may feel the urge to include an actual place or business in my model I can change it to satisfy my own eye and senses rather than having to conform to the restrictions of someone else's creation or possession when that slice of reality may well be something they would improve or change if they had the opportunity.

Mimicry may well enough be the greatest form of flattery but given the choice between being flattering and being creative I'll always have to step to the latter.

After three years of involvement with this forum you have posted half of your published thoughts in this particular thread. It appears that the subject has raised your defenses in that the majority of your remarks have been such. That strikes me as odd when you espouse to be precisely modelling an actual scene rather than creating something of your own that might require defending. The stringent reality mode may be an effect of your culture but it may as well be easier to respond to inquiries and potential criticism with pictures of the scene you are trying miniaturize rather than actually having to explain why you did something a certain way.

Paraphrasing a Patriot, I would defend your right to do whatever you chose to do even if I fail to appreciate the motive for your doing it. In the greater scheme of things, you might be right.

Good luck with your efforts.

Dave

[jeffers_mz]

"I can't see the point in modelling something that never existed, or worse, copying another bloke's model of something that never existed."

"You may have seen mention in Model Railroader of a concept they call "Layout Design Elements"? That's basically what I'm doing."



Much better things to do here than start a flame war, so I'm just going to let the above author's words speak for themselves. Quite a lot to digest there if you take the time to look at the attitude and intent of the person who originally typed the above quoted passages.

Regarding John Allen, a layout he did was featured in the only book I ever read on model railroading, a huge thing with the word "Bible" in the title if I remember right. It's been 30 to 35 years, but I do remember a massive mountain with a very sharp looking steel bridge traversing it, and I also remember thinking that no self respecting engineer would wrap a bridge like that around a mountain like that unless Acme was charging $3000 a case for 40% gelignite.

As for John Allen, or Lynn Westcott's or anyone else's influence on my layout, it's there, but it's indirect and it's subtle.

I stay away from the how-to books and the magazines, and prefer instead to come here and choose for myself what I read. But the how-to's I do elect to assimilate were written by people who probably did not deliberately avoid influences from past greats, and therefore, some of that gets passed on to me, secondhand.

I like sitting down in my warm shop on a cold winter's day, barefoot, and polishing up the magnifying headset, turning on the arc lights until the room inside is brighter than the snow outside, settling in with a fresh cupof coffee and new deck of smokes, and painstakingly sanding the surface of a single rivet for hours if need be to get it the way I want it.

The way I want it might be so prototype that the original owner would stop dead in his tracks and say "That's it!", and then again, the way I want it that particular day might have a bullet train racing up a 5% grade, over a 120 year old trestle, and past a logging camp.

It's my little world, and I make all the decisions. If I look elsewhere for hints, advice and the voice of wisdom gained through experience I don't possess, I do so by choice, but the final decision whether to follow it or screw things up my own special way is mine alone.

I'm in this to have fun, and sometimes having fun means making it real, and sometimes it means something else entirely. It's becoming clear to me that some folks do not put fun at the top of their priority list in this hobby, and if that's their choice I will respect it, so long as they earn whatever they are after by their own positive merit.

It's becoming clear to me that some folks do not put fun at the top of their priority list in this hobby, and if that's their choice I will respect it, so long as they earn whatever they are after by their own positive merit.

No typo, that was in there twice for a specific reason.

Back to John Allen, that was one very sharp mountain, as pretty a set of rocks as I've ever seen live, or on any model then or since, which to me, says a lot because we were still in the chicken wire and plaster of paris dark ages way back then.

Onward, there's a train show today, and daddy needs a fleet of locos that are out of production.

[marknewton]

rripperger wrote:

QUOTE: Response noted. I can't remember any other modeler whose photos could fetch $126 in a tattered softbound version - can you, Mark?

What's that old saying about fools and their money being easily parted? An overpriced book is not compelling evidence of anyone's greatness.

QUOTE: There's a reason JA was considered great. Gracious acceptance and interest in others' work was a part of it, as Linn Westcott and Jim Findley have amply attested elsewhere. I'm quite sure if he were alive, he would've treated your particular work with kinder words than you've allowed his.

Is saying that you prefer other styles of modelling really that unkind in your view? Because that's about as strong an opinion as I've expressed about Allen's work...

[marknewton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Brunton

While I'm sure your attempt at being totally realistic is genuine, the simple fact is that, in any scale smaller than probably S, you cannot do it and have anything other than a static display that would suffer damage at the merest touch.
For example, take a look at track elements...
So even an exact-scale approach has to have some compromises. Unless, of course, you've found a source of the mineral unobtainium from which to make your parts....[:D]

I can't decide whether you're being deliberately obtuse, or you genuinely misinterpreted what I wrote. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume you were being facetious.

So for the record, I'm not claiming that I use scale thickness materials, or prototypical track fastenings, or any other similarly unfeasible methods or techniques. I happily accept compromises in these areas without question.

What I am doing is modelling a small location to scale in the sense that all of the distances, building dimensions and locations, track geometry, spacing and curve radius are scaled from the prototype, without condensation, selective compression or any other fudging. It can easily be done, and is frequently done. You may have seen mention in Model Railroader of a concept they call "Layout Design Elements"? That's basically what I'm doing.

All the best,

Mark.

[SpaceMouse]

QUOTE: Originally posted by marknewton


I build just about everything from scratch now, so having no RTR Big Boys wouldn't bother me one bit. I reckon the RGS bloke and I would get along just fine. I take it he has no burning need for fleets of Big Boys either/

While I admire you for taking the bull by the horns and scratch building all your structures, etc. Scratch building today is not the same as scratch building a few years ago. But it took the John Allens to show what scratch building could be so that people like you would have it easy.

Just like you might not like Andy Warhol's Campbell's Soup Cans, but they stood the art world on it's ear and changed the course of art. Allen did that as well. And while you can argue that Allen was only know because of his publication--that's just the way it is.

History is defined by what's written by the victors.
Societies are defined by the prison system.
Art is defined by museums and model railroad history is defined by the publications.

[SpaceMouse]

Mark N,

In my book at least, there is a great difference between seeking to understand the masters and poopy worship. One can appreciate why a person did what they did and still not imitate it.

I added one drover's caboose with G&D on the side to my layout to represent a ranch, an industry off--layout. That is my tribute to John Allen. And it was a very convenient tribute as it solved a problem I had. But I do like his bridges and I'm going to build a trestle bridge--but that is what they did in 1885. I'd love to build floor to ceiling because that was cool, but I made a deal with my wife that includes under layout storage space.

But I just added 3 staging tracks and a car card system after reading Koester's book. So I must be worshiping Koester right? Oh yeah, I'm going to build some landscape using the techniques from Joe Fugate. And in a few months I'll be building the Redwood Empire--wait a minute the layout I wanted to build before I read Allen or Koester hasn't really been done by anyone I know of.

I guess I better start looking for another poopy.

[marknewton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Texas Zepher

QUOTE: Originally posted by marknewton

QUOTE: Suddenly the market for 4-6-6-4s, Big Boys, and all other large power would be zippo. Other than the collectors who put them on shelves there would be no place an ordinary person could run them.

Probably, but so what if it did?

They would all go out of business and the 100% acurate people would have to build everything from scratch. There would be no forms like this. I know of two people that would be left in the hobby. Yourself, and that fellow I mentioned in the prior post who had done 3/4 of a mile of RGS.

I build just about everything from scratch now, so having no RTR Big Boys wouldn't bother me one bit. I reckon the RGS bloke and I would get along just fine. I take it he has no burning need for fleets of Big Boys either/

QUOTE: If you only have a limited space, why try to jam all of Sherman Hill into it? Why not something smaller and more manageable?

QUOTE: Thats easy - I can't think of any place I could model 1 to 1 that wouldn't be boring. Even with my anticipated 30' x 90' space. Not to mention watching or even running the one train that would come by every 30 minutes or so if a really busy place was choosen...

[:D][:D][:D] You reckon a train every 30 minutes is busy? Jeez, where I come from that'd be the frequency in middle of the night on a public holiday.

Still, just because you're easily bored doesn't make my choices about what I model any less valid. Obviously my approach doesn't suit everybody.

[marknewton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by davekelly

Mark,I don't understand you. Earlier when you thought my post about what constitutes a "serious" modeler might somehow diss you and you became upset asking why do we disparge others. Yet from what I can see you come right back and do it yourself - calling a man delusional because others call him one of the greats. Maybe someday after I see all the published work by you in which you show your work and share your obvious talents with the rest of us thus helping to propell us to "serious" status I can better understand where you are coming from.

"Diss you" ? I don't understand you. Could you rephrase that in English, please?

As for me, what's to understand? I don't share the consensus view that John Allen is a great modeller. That's where I'm coming from.

[CNJ831]

QUOTE: Originally posted by marknewton

That is the cultural difference I'm talking about, they worship the tall poppies unquestioningly. That, and their apparent great desire to conform. They've been told for so long by Model Railroader magazine and other sources that John Allen is the greatest modeller ever that they believe it without thinking twice. And when someone expresses a dissenting view, as I have done, they react very badly, as you have seen. A simple observation about my modelling preferences is variously described as "negative", "bashing", "tearing things down", and other such nonsense. Here in Australia such a comment would be regarded as just another opinion, and not be at all contentious. For a group of people who keep repeating the mantra "have fun", they seem to go a bit mad when they encounter somone having fun in a way that's different to theirs.

As for 'spacemouse', I think we have great personal cultural differences. He comes across as a bit of new-age type, someone who likes to waffle on with what he himself describes as psycho-babble.

All the best,

Mark.

Well said, Mark.

CNJ831

[marknewton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by twhite

QUOTE: Originally posted by marknewton

QUOTE: Originally posted by rripperger

And for those who've offered nasty insinuations about the talents of freelancers, and particularly for those who've criticized The Wizard of Monterey...(snip)

The Wizard of Monterey?

Someone tell him he's dreaming.

Sorry Mark, that's what John Allen was known as for years--even in MR magazine. Can't fight facts, my friend--or history.

Yeah, yeah. MR wrote it, so it must be true. As far as I can see, the main reason for John Allen's fame is MR editorial endorsement over the years.

[marknewton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dwRavenstar

There are two ways to have the tallest building in the neighborhood; you build yours up or tear the others down.
Considering the two majority posters in this thread it's my opinion that one of you has put forth the effort to engage in a philosophical discussion while the other has taken every available opportunity to deride every opinion that has been offered from every corner. I'll allow it to each of you to decide which description applies where.
Railroad modelling is a self-indulgence, a method of self expression and a creation of something that brings satisfaction when it's done properly. When it suits YOU it's being done properly. You might as well attack someone for speaking in the wrong language or with the wrong accent when you comment that their way of seeing or doing something in a way that makes them happy and hurts no one else is wrong.

Well, I'll take this opportunity to deride your opinion, too. Where have commented that anybody's way of seeing or doing something in a way that makes them happy and hurts no one else is wrong? Feel free to quote any post where I have done so...

All the best,

Mark.

[marknewton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Grubby

No, I think it is a fair comment, but several of your responses from their have been fairly offensive to those not acquainted with the Australian communication standard [:P]

I dont like that sort of stuff either but being critical of it to the extent this thread has generated shows a distinct lack of understanding of the "artistic" side of this hobby. You dont have to like it to appreciate the skill and imagination these guys have. To dismiss their "art" because it doesnt float your boat is your perogative, but expect people to defend their "idols" and people they consider pioneers and master craftsmen.

I don't think I've ever dismissed anyone's "art" - I've simply said that I don't like it a particular style of modelling, and prefer other styles. There's a big difference. But you're right in saying I don't understand the so-called "artistic" side of the hobby. I can't see the point in modelling something that never existed, or worse, copying another bloke's model of something that never existed.

QUOTE: Being careful when treading on people's toes is apparently a cultural difference I have noticed especially on these forums. Americans seem to have a distinct lack of "tall poppy syndrome", and we are definately in the minority here. I am still intrigued as to this cultural difference you speak of though..

That is the cultural difference I'm talking about, they worship the tall poppies unquestioningly. That, and their apparent great desire to conform. They've been told for so long by Model Railroader magazine and other sources that John Allen is the greatest modeller ever that they believe it without thinking twice. And when someone expresses a dissenting view, as I have done, they react very badly, as you have seen. A simple observation about my modelling preferences is variously described as "negative", "bashing", "tearing things down", and other such nonsense. Here in Australia such a comment would be regarded as just another opinion, and not be at all contentious. For a group of people who keep repeating the mantra "have fun", they seem to go a bit mad when they encounter somone having fun in a way that's different to theirs.

As for 'spacemouse', I think we have great personal cultural differences. He comes across as a bit of new-age type, someone who likes to waffle on with what he himself describes as psycho-babble.

All the best,

Mark.

[CNJ831]

QUOTE: Originally posted by sundayniagara

After reading some of the early threads on this subject, I am dismayed that anyone would have the nerve to bad-mouth one of the most beautiful model train layouts ever built. I am still dazzled to this day. Chutzpah - - unmitigated gall.
Mark

Mark, you have to understand that there are still many hobbyists around today that were contemporary with John Allen and who, while they may respect his work, are well aware that his efforts were not the be-all end-all of the hobby...then or now. I suspect that what some older modelers are resenting about this thread is the gushing of hobbyists who came long, long after John's time and are talking of John as if he was little short of creating our hobby singlehandedly.

In its time, while always considered spectacular, the G&D rarely inspired others to copy it or employ it as any sort of basis for their own layouts, as did those of so many later great modelers in MR. Save for its tall, spindley bridges and deep chasms, the G&D directly influenced the modeling efforts of other hobbyist very little at the time, or ever! Modelers of John's era were into conventional-looking layouts, just as today, often building layouts that resembled the ones at the 1939 World's Fair far more than the G&D.

Then too, John's final layout was uniquely different, purposely and cleverly designed specifically to wow and impress the viewer (unlikethe original G&D). It was far from representing anything conventional and while it might have been a topic of hobby shop conversation, few honestly wanted anything like it. Even back then, lots of modelers didn't care for the unrealistic, Disneyesque look of the G&D.

I'd recommend anyone interested in John's work, whether critic or booster, to actually go back and read those old MRs and RMCs and see what the hobby was all about back then and just what position John Allen occupied. You're likely to find almost as many critics as supporters, even back then!

Me? I think John was a modeler of considerable talent and even better at using a camera and writing articles that gave exposure to his efforts. But would I want a copy of the G&D for my personal layout? Honestly...no.

CNJ831