Thread by @garius

I'm proud of the small role we played in this at @lonrec.

Whilst our main focus is London, we decided long ago that there's no point having a platform if you don't offer it to others when they need one.

When people are trying to open a door, you don't watch. You help them push.

https://twitter.com/GarethDennis/status/1447544208244490245

When @GarethDennis showed me his early research on the links between slavery and the railways, it was clear that it was the tip of a large iceberg.

With my own historian hat on, It was also clear WHY it wasn't being studied: because railway history is emotional for so many.

In the most part, that's not a problem. In a way it's a good thing. It's why we get so MUCH good stuff on railway history.

But it also makes railway history intensely conservative and adherent to existing narratives, particularly around its origins and the romance of steam.

That places barriers to new areas of exploration that are tricky to overcome. Particularly on questions of race and sex, because the sheer weight of the existing published narratives makes people think that there are no BIG questions left to ask.

And that's just not true.

Not because anyone who has already studied this areas, in detail, has deliberately ignored anything. Not because they were bad at what they did.

Simply because SOCIETY has hidden biases in what we record, and that gives us biases in what we look for or prioritise.

That combo of societal bias and deep romantic connection is strong and dangerous in railway history studies. Particular popular history.

Metaphorically, the door often isn't just closed to reexamining railway history for some, they're accidentally leaning on it to keep it shut.

And so, for both me as an editor and @lonrec as a platform, once Gareth had shown me his research it was NEVER a question of whether we should give it a home.

From that point it was ALWAYS about how we could use what weight we had to help push that door open too.

And, as Gareth himself says, enormous credit has to go to both @networkrail and @SirPeterHendy here.

When we approached them and asked them to lend their name to the series too, they instantly made the same decision:

It wasn't 'should we?'. It was 'how can we help?'

The final piece on slavery and the railways is one of our most read pieces ever. It's certainly one of our most contentious. I know what abuse I got as an Editor for publishing it, and I know that was only 1/5th of what GD got for writing it. londonreconnections.com/2020/slavery-a…

We don't get trade/writing awards for things. The downsides of not being a traditional platform. Sometimes that bugs me. But then I realise it gives us the flexibility to shout loudly where others can't.

We were able to do that here, and I wouldn't swap that for anything.

As both a railway journalist and a historian, I look forward to seeing the outcome of this research project and many more to come.

And I hope that, over time, a lot of people will realise it hurts the railways more when we deny our history than when we acknowledge it.

And, very finally, an EXTRA special shoutout to @LongBranchMike, who tirelessly worked to moderate the comments on the piece at the time, and to ensure that our site goal of providing a space for debate - but that debate has to be fair - was maintained. A real challenge here!