"Should form really always follow function?"

[RCD]

from http://www.friendsofbuick.com/news/07-07-2006.html:

Respected longtime automotive journalist asks,

should form really always follow function?

###

Ann Arbor, MI -- July 7, 2006 - Form follows function has become a mantra that has taken on a life of its own. Rooted in German prewar Bauhaus ideas, by which each aspect of a product's design mirrors its function, the wholesale adoption of this ideology by an automotive industry suffering a dearth of ideas in the fuel crises of the '70s resulted in a series of cookie-cutter cars in the '80s, and manifested into a series of molds which were applied to various segments, across brands and parent companies, in the '90s.

In the latest issue of Britain's CAR magazine (CAR, July 2006), its Executive Editor (and former Editor) Gavin Green asks whether "cars that can eke out ever square inch of cabin space from their modest dimensions; sip fuel like a miser yet still go briskly, and are conceived down to the last penny in computerized cost control" should truly be a universal, unquestionable goal for today's automotive industry.

Green laments the absence of "great design and engineering romantics" (formerly, men such as Jaguar's Sir William Lyons and Fiat's Dante Giacosa), writing that the car has become a "consumer good."

Friends of Buick (http://www.friendsofbuick.com) agrees wholeheartedly with Green's assessment. Why should form be subservient to function, across every segment and brand?

We believe that there is room in the market for Buick's brand of enduring values, clearly communicated, and for Buick's unique design compromise between stoic presence, and sprinkles of romanticism in graceful body lines aft of an imposing prow. Buick's very mission is elegance without ostentation.

The automobile is more than transportation; more than simply a consumer good. We maintain, for reasons outlined in length in our FAQ section, that if every vehicle is inherently a compromise, each should clearly outline a compromise chosen by a single person.

At Buick, in many respects, General Motors Vice Chairman of Product Development Robert A. Lutz continues to both steer the compromise, and to embody this vision of fewer Vehicle Line Engineers, and more personal investment in design. It is no coincidence that Gavin Green, in his piece, bemoans that "elegance, like manners and restrained language, is a dying breed," adding that, "nowadays car style is all about being seen. Eye-catching is more important than eye pleasing. Modern cars are increasingly aggressive, in yer face."

After all, Mr. Lutz himself five years ago expressed that several automotive designs looked either "like a whole family of angry kitchen appliances: demented toasters; furious bread machines, and vengeful trash compactors," or were "the assemblages of mere steel tubes; leather, and plastic (that) look like exercise machines."

Understated today's Buick LaCrosse midsize sedan may be, but such a description could never fit it.

Despite what Lutz described as "designers no longer designing for the public, but rather for each other, trying to be ever more off-the-wall than the competition," he also observed concepts that "seemed to be drowning in a sea of sameness: tiny windows; flat fronts; rhomboidal headlights, and slab sides."

Lutz concluded, "it reminds me of the height of the abstract-art boom in the 1960s and 1970s, when you viewed one blue circle and one line on a canvas, and then had to read a two-page description of what the artist meant."

Understated the LaCrosse may be, but appreciating it asks simply that one observes light dance across its gradually delineated planes, rather than question a ham-fisted, incongruously sheared approach to surfacing.

Indeed, we encourage comparison with the Toyota Avalon's flat surfaces; bluff front end, and lengthy front overhang which drags lethargically over its front wheel. Avalon's wheelarches themselves make no attempt to integrate into the body, leaving the car appearing undertired. Contrast with Buick designers, who spent considerable time perfecting LaCrosse's fender-to-tire relationship. For Buick, this is a key aspect of visual athleticism, and has been closed by 5/8ths of an inch versus Buicks of just a few years ago.

Understated the LaCrosse may be, but its curvaceous surfacing and form belies the mass-produced nature of its segment - and, despite its entry-level stature in the Buick line, arguably celebrates the romance of the automobile more than does a vehicle with a parallel waterline and oversized details atop a body that blandly (if perhaps protectively) deemphasizes the very wheels responsible for the vehicle's motion. This might describe several LaCrosse competitors.

We must additionally note with satisfaction that, as with the Mercedes-Benz CLS four-door coupé that Green cites as an intriguing antithesis to bland pragmatism, the LaCrosse offers a graceful, coupé-esque roofline that adds in grace what it might sacrifice in headroom.

Friends of Buick commends CAR for its courageous, important comments on automotive design today. This magazine, for which Mr. Green was once Editor, has in its 40+ years given the world the literary works of analysts as provocative as the late, great George Bishop and LJK Setright. Gavin Green's editorial is worthy of such ageless former work, and indeed of the romantic timelessness for which some automakers continue to strive in their cars.

###

FriendsOfBuick.com is neither affiliated with, nor endorsed by, General Motors Corporation.

[WCCPSGM]

WHAT! How dare you insinuate something NOT look just like every other car! At least Buick is not as pug-ugly as that new Camry! I prefer Lucerne's style though.

[VenSeattle]

WHAT!  How dare you insinuate something NOT look just like every other car!  At least Buick is not as pug-ugly as that new Camry!  I prefer Lucerne's style though.

166424[/snapback]

Hey! Don't insult my Pug like that! She's cuter than the new Camry!

(I'll add pic later) lol