With my mug of hot, dark and strong, coffee in hand on this chilly Sunday morning, it is time to ponder...

The more I wear my Steampunk clothes out in public,the first question, after the obligatory "Why are you dressed like that?", is usually "What is Steampunk anyway?"

I've given a variety of answers, depending on the context. Things like; it is neo-victorian, or quasi-victorian, or an alternate history, or techno-fantasy, or like the Wild-Wild-West, Sherlock Holmes ( the movie), or the stories of Jules Verne or H.G.Wells (and others I can't recall at the moment). 

While these are all reasonable catch phrases to use to describe Steampunk, they are just that, "catch phrases", and not really a description or explanation. Consequently, I usually get a request for more information, which is where I usually fall back on the traditional comments about: "What if Babbage's engine, mechanical computer etc, had worked." or "What if the technological development had stopped with Steam?" or any of a half dozen other "What ifs".

A difficulty with explaining Steampunk, is not an uncommon problem. Looking up "What is Steampunk?" in Google will turn up many pages worth of different descriptions and explanations, long and short, most of which can be traced to elaborations on the comments above.

So why is it so difficult to distill Steampunk down to a sound bite, or even to a nice socially digestible paragraph or two?

I think it is because the Steampunk world is actually a "World" in the big sense of that word. It is not simply a costume style, alternative music scene, design aesthetic, or social subculture. Steampunk encompasses all of these, in many ways it is more diverse and complex than the Goth and Punk movements, with which it shares many costuming and social components. Not having been a member of either the Goth or Punk scenes I have not had to describe them to others, but I suspect it is just as difficult to do.

At first it seems that Steampunk should be relatively easy to put in a soundbite box, the "What ifs" and Neo-Victorian costuming are probably sufficient for most people. On further reflection it becomes apparent to me that there is vastly more here that should be explained, if only to promote our interests to others. Steampunk is surprisingly attractive to many people. People that one would not at first expect to be interested at all, are donning a corset and goggles, or a top hat and cravat, and heading out for tea at the nearest fancy hotel or quaffing a pint at an English style pub. People who would never think of taking their car apart for fun, are tearing apart old clocks and gluing and sewing their gears to their hats and delving into the arcane mysteries of Babbage's Difference Engine and watching in fascination the Youtube videos of old steam engines, airships and early motor cars.

I've noticed an interesting pattern, when there is one Steampunk there will shortly be more!
(Heh. No comments from the wags about cockroaches! )

Once people perceive that it is OK to dress up and pursue their interests, in the way the Steampunk scene allows them to do, it doesn't take long before they start to do just that.

But what is it about Steampunk that is so attractive to so many people?  It is not simply a matter of being "Goths who discovered brown" as a friend once snidely remarked. Nor is it strictly speaking a "Geek" thing or an "historical re-creation gone bad" thing, although that is part of it I think.

Why is it so hard to pick a few common elements to use in a description? My own reasons for being active in the Steampunk World aren't the same as yours or anyone elses, and like most things in life, our motivations are idiosyncratic and the result of our own history and experiences. So trying to distill "Steampunk" down to a soundbite is just as hard as doing that for our real life, and perhaps, just as futile. However the process of trying to do this may give us some insights that are otherwise lost in the complexity, and there may be some common elements that would be interesting to identify.

In future posts I'm going to describe some of my ways of looking at Steampunk that might be useful, or at least interesting.

Thanks for reading.
Keep your sightglass full, your firebox trimmed and your water iced.
KJ

Found this lovely collage of images in my ramblings this snowy morning.
It is a book trailer for  "Frank Reade: Adventures in the Age of Invention"



From Youtube:
A trailer for the book "Frank Reade: Adventures in the Age of Invention"
Before Jules Verne's flying machines and H. G. Wells's spaceships, there was Frank Reade, globe-trotting inventor and original steampunk hero. Frank Reade magazines were the world's first science fiction periodicals, enthralling millions of readers with tales of fantastic inventions and adventures. Now many of the spectacular images from the vintage dime novel series are being reprinted for the first time in more than a century, along with excerpts from the action-packed stories. In Frank Reade: Adventures in the Age of Invention, this lost legacy of Americana is interwoven with a biography of the "real" Reade family—inventors and explorers who traveled the world with their helicopter airships, submarines, and robots, and who encountered figures like Geronimo and Houdini. This epic saga is brought to life in the multimedia style of the authors' previous volume, the critically acclaimed Boilerplate: History's Mechanical Marvel. Frank Reade is part science fiction, part history, and entirely exciting!

This trailer was created by Paul Guinan on his Mac using iMovie. Paul's images are all from the Frank Reade book that he co-authored with wife Anina Bennett. The book is published by Abrams Image and was released in February 2012.
------
I just wish the video spent a tad more time on each image, the pause button is your friend.
Keep your sightglass full, your firebox trimmed and your water iced.
KJ

Pipe organs that is.

This profusely illustrated two volume Dover reprint of The Art of Organ Building by George Ashdown Audsley was originally published in 1905.

What I find most fascinating about this book is the intricacy of the mechanisms that connect the beautiful ivory and ebony keyboards to the hundreds, and sometimes thousands, of pipes in a big pipe organ. I'm sure we've all seen the famous scene of Captain Nemo playing his pipe organ in the saloon of the Nautilus while the storm rages on the surface above or, more recently, Captain Davey Jones playing his on the Flying Dutchman in Pirates II. These instruments, whether small chamber versions like those on the Nautilus or in many an evil genius' lair, or the massive organs in cathedrals and concert halls, are truly the "King of Instruments".

In their 19th c forms they were magnificent examples of wooden engineering, made of natural materials for the most part. Elegant machines of finely balanced levers, rollers, fine wires and leather clad close grained wood. Thousands of moving parts all aligned and adjusted to transmit the finest touch of the organist to the valve opening air to the base of a pipe that might be as small as a match stick or as big around as an ale barrel and over a hundred feet long!

The 400 illustrations included in this 1300 page masterwork, cover the whole range of mechanisms from the earliest Roman and Mediaeval instruments, played by slamming the keys with closed fists, to early 20th c pneumatic and electro-pneumatic systems.

A fantastic source of ideas on linking one motion to another in elegant and efficient ways.

Title
The Art of Organ-Building
A Comprehensive Historical, Theoretical, and Practical Treatise
on the
Tonal Appointment and Mechanical Construction
of Concert-Room, Church and Chamber Organs

Author
George Ashdown Audsley, LL.D.
Architect

Publisher
Dodd, Mead, and Company
New York

Date
1905
Dover Re-print 1965

ISBN: 0-486-21314-5

Keep your sight glass full and your firebox trimmed.
KJ

I can't say much more than this...

Caveat Emptor!
Keep your sightglass full, your firebox trimmed and your wallet closed!
KJ

A TV report on the "League of Victorian Imagineers" in Oamaru NZ.

Oamaru 'steampunk' festival kicks off


More info here:
The League of Victorian Imagineers



Keep your sightglass full, your firebox trimmed and your water iced.
Kevin/Max

Imagine the clockwork inside this beauty...

More info from the creator Thomas Kuntz 

"The Alchemyst's Tower" 2004-2008
Absolutely the most ambition project to date. It took many years to realize this automaton and care was used to make the advanced technology below stage adaptable in the future while keeping the figure itself purely mechanical. The Alchemyst is only 12" tall and consists of hundreds of hand machined brass and steel pieces. The tower itself consists of thousands of pieces was built from scratch out of wood, steel brass and fabric and just about any other high quality material where needed. The industrial machinery includes pneumatic valves, servos, clockwork, lighting and fountain (water) systems.

An amazing piece!
Keep your sightglass full, your firebox trimmed and your water iced.
KJ

In case anyone is wondering



From Wikipedia:
---
Whether to call it the "Union Flag" or the "Union Jack" is a matter of debate by many. According to the Flag Institute, the vexillological organisation for the United Kingdom, "the national flag of the United Kingdom, the Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories is the Union Flag, which may also be called the Union Jack."[4] It also notes that "From early in its life the Admiralty itself frequently referred to the flag as the Union Jack, whatever its use, and in 1902 an Admiralty Circular announced that Their Lordships had decided that either name could be used officially. In 1908, a government minister stated, in response to a Parliamentary question, that "the Union Jack should be regarded as the National flag" .[5][6] Nevertheless, the term "Union Flag" is used in King Charles's proclamation of 1634,[7] and in King George III's proclamation of 1 January 1801 concerning the arms and flag of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.[8]

When the first flag representing Britain was introduced on the proclamation of King James I in 1606, it became known simply as "the British flag" or "the flag of Britain". The royal proclamation gave no distinctive name to the new flag. The word "jack" was in use before 1600 to describe the maritime bow flag.[5] By 1627 a small Union Jack was commonly flown in this position. One theory goes that for some years it would have been called just "the Jack", or "Jack flag", or "the King's Jack", but by 1674, while formally referred to as "His Majesty's Jack", it was commonly called the Union Jack, and this was officially acknowledged.[3]

Amongst the proclamations issued by King George III at the time of the Union of 1801 was a proclamation concerning flags at sea, which referred to "Our Flags, Jacks, and Pendants" and forbade merchant vessels from wearing "Our Jack, commonly called the Union Jack" nor any pendants or colours used by the King's ships.[9] In contrast, the King's proclamation of the same day concerning the arms and flag of the United Kingdom, not colours at sea, called the new flag "the Union Flag".

The size and power of the Royal Navy internationally at the time could also explain why the flag was named the "Union Jack"; considering the navy was so widely utilised and renowned by the United Kingdom and colonies, it is possible that the term "Jack" occurred because of its regular use on all British ships using the "Jack Staff" (a flag pole attached to the bow of a ship). In other words, a "Union Flag" is called a "Union Jack" when flown from the Jack of a ship. Even if the term "Union Jack" does derive from the jack flag (as perhaps seems most likely), after three centuries, it is now sanctioned by use, has appeared in official use, and remains the popular term.[10]
---
The Americans also have a "Union Jack" it is the blue box with white stars from the US flag and is flown the same way on US Navy ships.

As for whether the Union Jack can be flown upside down, it actually can.

Again from Wikipedia:
---
Flying

The flag does not have reflection symmetry, due to the slight pinwheeling of St Patrick's cross, which is technically called the counterchange of saltires. Thus, it has a right side and a wrong side up. To fly the flag the correct way up, the broad portion of the white cross of St Andrew should be above the red band of St Patrick (and the thin white portion below) in the upper hoist canton (the corner at the top nearest to the flag-pole), giving the Scottish symbol precedence over the Irish symbol. This is expressed by the phrases wide white top and broad side up. Traditionally, flying a flag upside down is understood as a distress signal. In the case of the Union Flag, the difference is so subtle as to be easily missed by many. Indeed, some people have displayed it upside down inadvertently.[12]

On 3 February 2009, the BBC reported that the flag had been inadvertently flown upside-down by the UK government at the signing of a trade agreement with Chinese premier Wen Jiabao. The error had been spotted by readers of the BBC news website who had contacted the BBC after seeing a photograph of the event.[13]

Union Flag with red bars in diagonals to one side of the white diagonals, such that there is a thicker white border on one side. The red bars are all off-centre as if they had been pushed in an anticlockwise direction.
Right way to fly the flag, assuming hoist to the left


Union flag where red bars in diagonals are moved off-centre in a clockwise direction. This is both the vertical and horizontal mirror image of the previous image.
Wrong way to fly the flag, assuming hoist to the left

---
This is particularly subtle and takes a sharp eye to notice.
I thought it didn't matter myself until I actually played with the flag at the Victoria Day event, and even then when I messed with pictures it looked like it didn't. However when you flip the flag the hoist stays on the same side, it isn't just rotating the image. Duh.

Keep your sightglass full, your firebox trimmed and your water iced.
KJ