Sodor Lebensraum

my response to a marxist criticism of thomas the tank engine.

it is a great article... read it.


-----
This is a wonderful, well written piece of criticism. Many of the strangely angry responses seem to miss the joy of this article: that it states a possible interpretation without actually making a value judgment about its morality or message (beyond "liberal parents may feel uneasy").

That said, I would take issue with the notion that Thomas is "imperialist" or espouses "colonial" values. The other theme in the article touches on (albeit almost as a subtext) is the almost Confucian relationship between the working class (the trains) and the bourgeois (the fat controller et al): a patriarchal system where the Fat Controller assumes responsibility over the trains in return for which the trains give unwavering loyalty and labour. Thomas at times seems almost an allegory of Engels' The Condition of the Working Class in England. In fact tacit acceptance and reinforcement of traditional English class values seems to me to be a more dominant discourse in the Tank Engine books, than that of colonialism (or specifically racial prejudice, for that is what the author seems to imply). The racism of Thomas seems like the casual off hand prejudice common in men of Awdry's generation, utterly anachronistic and unforgivable now, but somehow cultural appropriate in mid century Britain, particularly in the COE loving Baden Powell appreciating upper middle class.

There is another reading that springs to mind, after Guy Debord: that the Fat Controller represents the Spectacle and the engines become people in its thrall, a group of near slaves burdened with pleasing a system that doesn’t truly reward them. In this reading, engines like Hiro and Diesel, and of course Cranky the Crane come to represent seeming alternatives presented to the other Engines by the Spectacle to simulate a notion of choice and opposition to the Spectacle itself. Sadly Awdry failed to write his planned final book which described the exact mechanism of a post-marxist revolution.
My two and half year old son is, unfortunately, obsessed with this Train With Eyes On. Images of Thomas adorn crisp packets, bookshop signs, lunchboxes etc. all over the English child’s world. He is as ubiquitous as Ben 10. Given the content of Ben 10, Thomas actually seems like a good option. I’ve taken advantage of his obsession and used Thomas to teach more positive messages. An obvious example is that even Engines’ without ears can communicate with one another, in which I try to explain that disability needn’t be a barrier (the social model of disability seems more appropriate for a child than the medical model). More complex are long and drawn adaptations of fairy stories which recast trains with eyes in roles normally reserved for princesses, kings and little boys. These stories have a wonderful effect of teaching more positive morality while at the same time dispelling the notion that Thomas should be an official piece of intellectual property, owned by a corporation rather than something which live and take on new forms in our imagination.

I do, however, worry about constantly teaching and reinforcing a message that in order to be happy, one has to be “useful”. This does indeed seem inappropriate for a young child. He has learned a lot from Thomas, and I positively refute various suggestions that this franchise is has no effect on development and that children don’t pick up on what’s going on and start to internalise its morality. The child’s mind is like a sponge, if you don’t think they’re learning from everything they do or watch, you underestimate your kids. The “useful” message has so far been great in getting the boy to tidy up after himself, but I am concerned about its long term influence: will he be racked by a sense of guilt which drives him into conformity and makes him a very susceptible subject to social control?
Anyway, I look forward to reading more. And, for an interesting next article, could I suggest a study of themes in the tiger that came to tea. I am convinced it is an unpleasant allegory about immigration to England from the subcontinent following partition in post-imperialist India. A tiger who turns up uninvited and eats all the food? It could almost be propaganda for the EDL.