He really elaborates on the retro designs. It's even an old article from 2002, before the new Mustang which is interesting.

http://www.autofieldguide.com/articles/040201.html

 

As a design professional I'd have to agree with what he said in the article.

 

Often I think 'Retro' is the physical manifestation of "The futher you are away from home the more you desire it"

Meaning: Western cultures rapid technological advancements in conjunction with so many families being broken-up and spread out throughout the country makes people feel unsettled. This unsettled and/or uncomfortable feeling makes them look to symbols of the past (RETRO) as a reference to a simpler time when things were more defined. Retro items often have a way of bringing warm (comfortable)feelings to a person that can remind them of their youth, family, and home.

Ironically very modern and/or forward looking designs need to symbolize "hope" in the future and give people something to look forward too. People have a harder time grasping and accepting a "radical futuristic design" if they don't feel secure in the present.

 

That's very interesting as well. This is one of the deeper threads we've had around here.

 

We Americans love to romantize classic 1950's car culture. While much of it is justified in my opinion, it's odd that the 1950's was a time when designers were pushing the limits in Futuristic designs (at the time). So ironically the old-school "Classic" cars that so many Americans love today were actually some of the most "futuristic" designs of the 1950's.

So I guess what Americans love about cars of the 1950's is that they symbolize a pure-American concept of a "Hopeful" tommorow (and the fact they still look cool too doesn't hurt either).

 

The 1950 were probably IMO the most optimistic time in America in the last 60 years or so.

Alot of the styling (cars and otherwise) I think showed that sense of celebration, optimism and general happiness.

Now how do we get back to that......

 

You mean, without going to hell and back??

I think a lot of what happened in the 50's was a result of WWII. People going to war on an enormouse scale. Much suffering by many and a lot sacrifice back home...industry transformed. Folks ended up saving a lot of money from that sacrifice. A pent up demand for consumer goods resulted with a lot of industrial capacity.

Have you ever gone through something extrememly difficult? After doing without and sacrifice, things that you took for granted before have a whole new meaning.

I wonder if we could have a time like that one again. Don't get me wrong though. The pendulum will definitely swing back the other way eventually.

 

I agree with that but I add in the previous 13 years before WWII, the great depression.

After that much sacrifice and hardship it isn't hard to understand the exuberance of the '50s

I'm most definately not advocating any ill will on people or the country to get back to a more forward thinking atmoshpere. But I don't think retro design is going to make us look forward to tomorrow. I think it was Albert Einstein who said "Tomorrow's problems cannot be solved with yesterday's ideas".

(no to retro)

I'll buy a $1 chocolate chip cookie to remind me of Mom...but not a $29K car.

 

I agree with you when Retro is done solely as a a gimmick but on the other hand if your mom had a great cookie recipe in 1957 I bet the same recipe probably would taste pretty good today even if that recipe is nearly 50 years old.

What I mean is that a good formula or a good recipe tends to be good anytime and automotive design isnt that different. Sure certain design elements and formulas can be overdone or played-out over the years but often often time is the best judge if something is truly a work of art (not a $20 million advertising budget trying to convince you it is).

 

OK, but here's my counter arguement (and I'm not trying to sway an opinion, just continuing conversation).

My problem with retro is that it isn't my Mom's recipe. What made the original (whatever) great doesn't get translated into the knock off or imitator.

It's like listening to a cover band. Sure the beats the same and all but the magic just isn't there. The '68 Mustng and '69 Camaro (or to me the '70) were great and celebrated for being fresh and ground breaking for their day.

The '05 Mustang is like the remake of the 'Dukes of Hazzard' or 'Bewitched'.

 

Hey thats exactly how I feel on the issue as well....

 

Not all Retro cars are the same. Some cars are closer to the original formula then others and their sale success is often a reflection of this. I do beleive that often Retro designs are often used as a "Cash'n in" on an old classic-design. Only time will tell if going Retro symbolizes the end of that product line since its design cycle has gone a full circle.

 

I would argue that THE ONLY reason for a retro design is for a quick buck because it is easy and doesn't take any risks and for that reason, it will never be great. That automaker is trying to recall PAST glory and cash in on something that was great a long time ago. The retro designs are NOT the real thing and will (I think) be forgotten by history, sooner rather than later.

 

I still don't know why so have such a hang-up on (Retro) classic design themes such as circular headlights, large analog dials, and the use of chrome (or metalized plastic). I would also consider the use of 'colors' on the interior another use of a classic-design theme (Retro) as well.

In fact you could consider alot of the design-themes that are used on many of todays cars are nothing more then late-1970's, 1980's and even 1990's 'Retro' design-themes such as use cheap black plastic interiors, exteriors being painted one solid color with no chrome, designs that are inherantly weak (meaning they are easily forgettable), and adding electronic gadgets (to try to add excitement to a car that doesnt look exciting), and etc.

Sometimes I think everyone likes Retro is just depends on what decade you like

 

I disagree with most of what you said here, but I'm too hungry and lazy right now to type my point out. So maybe I'll get back to it.