The expectations of the public are met with very little contribution of creativity, as a consequence of the mediocrity of the public. Society presents resistance to dramatic aesthetic changes.
During reading this article it is important to bear in mind the following fact: the copete is part of the conclusion, and more importantly, note that although the issue to be addressed is car design, the copete does not mention it. This means that it does not restrict its meaning to any particular field of design, although it does not generalize too much.
In reality, the inability to accept sudden changes in short periods of time is a characteristic of the human being. Too far ahead of the present can be very bad business. An example of this is the case of the Chrysler Airflow. An advanced car for its time, with innovations in aerodynamics and safety measures. However, its distinct appearance, or should I say “ugly” in the vulgar language of those who do not critically and objectively analyze a product, was a very bitter drink for consumers at the time.
Throughout their history, French Renault, Peugeot and Citroen have been quite bold, presenting design concepts with aesthetic innovations. The result was always the same, the first sensation in the audience was a combination of surprise with rejection. In the long term, we should be very grateful to these companies, as they acted as a catalyst, that is, as a valid agent to change what today is for what tomorrow will be. Colloquially, this is known as expanding horizons, expanding the capacity to accept new trends.
Another point to look at is the following: for manufacturers, educating the public would be too demanding a challenge, I think it would be to test their ability to evolve at an intense pace, which they fear they will not be able to withstand (perhaps a small number would). Demonstrating that no decisive steps have been taken “really” (I emphasize REALLY) in half a century, is simple, but for companies it would be a big blow; more appropriately, I mean the egos of their managers.
Many of the proposed solutions are just patches to hide the real problem. If buyers demanded significant levels of evolution in the vehicles they buy year after year, they would not only be forced to invest more in research and development (R & D), but also in the constant training of design and engineering creatives. Here is another observation: “designers and engineers should be highly creative,” which at the moment does not usually happen. I always insist on this point, any product can be good and beautiful, but that is not enough to make it innovative.
Recently in the USA, Chrysler introduced the ME four twelve prototype, highlighted by its top speed of 400 km/h. At the other end, if you consult an expert on issues related to aerodynamics, you will explain that the car in question moves at pure engine force, as aerodynamically leaves much to be desired.
I find it “nice” (word with which I hide my indignation) to watch TV images of cars in a wind tunnel, in large factories with dozens of computers, claiming that they present the latest in aerodynamics studies... when what really happens is that you design a body as inefficient as any other, but disguised as “technological advancement”. They have the tools to progress, but they use them as mere elements of marketing and advertising.
To conclude with a recap reflection and raise:
The lack of creativity combined with the lack of appetite for it leads to the tightness of the parameters that establish what is within what the customer consumes, their tastes or preferences. More than a century of automotive history has shown us a wide but limited variety of proposals.
We've seen a lot, but not stocked. The surprise factor fades, as its place in a segment of products stagnated in outdated parameters is practically finished. I believe that a really new and different current in car design will only take place when the current concept of the car, as a means of transport and cultural icon, is completely renewed.
© Adrián Blanco 2004 — Prohibited the total or partial reproduction of text and/or images without explicit written consent of the author. —