|
Posted by Kenn Stamp
|
|
Wednesday, 01 August 2007 |
My father loves trains. He loves them so much that he buys
dvd’s about trains and train trips across America. Classic trains or modern trains he is train nuts. While watching those videos
about the old train engines and train cars with him, I started thinking about
design and use.
Looking at the way the cars were appointed (the polished brass
trim, plush upholstery, carved wood, etc.) really made me think about how we
(the human race) went from function following form, to form following function.
Humans used to put form first in a lot of what we did. No matter where you look the engineer’s function
has supplanted the designer’s form in the modern world.
I really started to despair about this loss of artistry in our daily lives. OK
so despair may be too strong a word, but it did get me down a little. I started
pondering some of my favorite things and how they have changed over time to
become slaves to function. I began to wonder if this form following function
illness was as widespread as I originally thought. After giving this subject
much thought I came to a few conclusions, some of which I’ll share with you.
I think that it can be said with some degree of certainty
that a Douglas DC-3 is a much prettier airplane than a Boeing 737. I think we
also would agree that a 1950’s era Buick is much prettier than anything they’ve
built recently. I could also list boats in this as well since an old wooden
Chris Craft is much prettier than a new Bayliner.
Of course my thoughts turned to motorcycles next (you’ve
been waiting for this haven’t you). I started thinking about 50’s and 60’s era
Triumphs, BSAs and Nortons, not to mention Ducati’s and Moto Guzzi’s. I then
started to mentally compare those bikes with their modern counterparts. I
realized that the design of motorcycles (with a few exceptions) hasn’t fallen
into the same function trap as everything else.
Can anyone truly say that the design of a Ducati (except the Multistrada) is
completely engineer driven with little to no thought for beauty? Is a 1964
Ducati 250 Mach 1 more beautiful than the 1098? Is a 1966 Triumph Bonneville
more visually appealing than the new Daytona 675?
Obviously beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I think that most people
will agree that when it comes to motorcycle design, form can exist on equal
terms with function. But why is that? Why do motorcycles, one of the last
bastions of beautiful forms, co-exist with function? Is it because motorcycles
are not logical? Is it because a motorcycle purchase more often than not comes
down to the bike that stirs your heart? The bike that makes you want to poke your
head in the garage 1000 times a day just to make sure “she” is still OK? The
bike that your wife calls the “other woman” because you “spend more time with
her than you do with me”?
I began to realize that function actually could work together with form instead
of beating it into a bloody pulp. Maybe all it takes is manufacturers
understanding that their customers are driven by passion and not logic.
Understanding the product they are selling is selling because while nobody
“needs” it a lot of people “want” it (“it” being whatever they are building). Maybe these are the reasons why the exotics (Ferrari, Lamborghini, Bugatti, etc..) Are also one of the last places you can go to find function and form playing nicely together.
Motorcyclists (and the really rich) are some of the last holdouts that prove there is still a
minority of people that aren’t willing to give up style just to get a few more
miles to the gallon. People that refuse to go quietly into that dark night of
bland, visually offensive machinery that has no soul or passion.
Maybe this is why people in Great Britain and European countries are more motorcycle mad than those in the USA. They are surrounded by old architecture and beauty in engineering far more than those of us here in the States. They see function and form working hand in hand everywhere and motorcycles fit into that "visual pattern" very nicely. Americans (North Americans for my Latin American readers) view motorcycles as toys and not something practical. We like our lives to be surrounded with things that make our lives easier, don't need too much attention, don't cause us to miss the important phone calls about our dry cleaning being done, and can transport us to our destination without causing any wrinkles or messed up hair.
Motorcycles don't do any of these things. Motorcycles stir your passions. They call out your name on beautiful evenings cajoling you into going for a ride. They require you to mess up your hair and get road grit on your clothes. They won't keep you dry in the rain or warm in the cold. They can be temperamental and fussy. Motorcyclists (real ones anyway) understand this and embrace it. Helmet hair is a hot fashion trend and being sweaty = having fun.
Form following function or function following form? Which would you choose? Me? I think I'll go mess up my hair and get sweaty.
|
