Like I said, a distinction needs to be made as to which of these models are designated as a concept as opposed to something designed for production and presumably consumption. I do think while not necessarily relevant to what we think of the aesthetics, it does give context to the approach to design. It’s true that even in concept land, some designs are more extreme than others, but that too is dependent on intention and success in communication, and also what you like to look at.
I embrace outrageousness, and I daresay vosnox does too. I don’t grant it any greater or lesser intrinsic value than elegance or any other aesthetic attribute, but I can appreciate the Egoista for the obnoxiousness that it is haha. My own preferences tend towards coherence, which, depending on your approach and vision, has varying difficulty (again, sleipnir taking the most difficult and least likely to succeed route). The disadvantage of this is that I’d have a very hard time picking who to vote for!
The Egoista has it’s place in the realm of automotive artistry. It’s mantle isn’t one of practicality or nuance. It’s purely Lamborghini doing what Lamborghini does best: Bringing their inner 5 year old into the design lab and letting it fiddle with every little thing. Is it practical? No. Is it reasonable? Surely not. Is it something you’d pick up someone in a blind date with? Hell no. Is it something you’d drive if you wanted to feel like you were in Battlestar Galactica? God yes. The Murcialago, while beautiful on nearly every level (with the exception being that one oil cooling vent on the side), its far to constrained for Lamborghini’s design style.
You mentioned the Gumpert Apollo. Yes, it’s ugly. Very ugly. Weapons grade ugly. But it works. It’s designed to do what it does very well. You wouldn’t drive an Apollo to pick up chicks. You’d drive it to impress other people who know a lot about cars. It’s a drivers car with out the driver’s ego. It’s not a Porsche 911, or a Ferrari California, or an Ariel Atom. Think of it like a woman. Sure. You can drive Scarlett Johansson or Jennifer Lawrence. Hell, you could drive Natalie Dorner, and you’d get all the looks your ego requires. Now, that isn’t to say that they wouldn’t drive well. I’m sure all three would your mind, but the girls that don’t look like fucking movie stars are the ones you want to drive. For the sake of fun and for thrills and hell, even for the sake of practicality you drive a woman who’s built to drive.
I think something got lost in that analogy LOL. For some reason the notion of “driving a woman” makes me uneasy, perhaps because the analogy requires objectification. But nonetheless I kinda get the point.
However is that the point of this thread? Methinks that the debate about this is in fact the real point
You should add all the pics under the poll in the original post, since that is where the link is. It makes it easier to look at all of them before voting.
Well, thanks to everyone who voted for the Halcyon I think most people knew it was my car anyway because of the headlight and taillight techniques and the fact that the number plate is perfectly in the middle of the front end.
Anyway, thanks also to Noporian, it was a fun competition!
Damn, I thought my car may have just scraped the lead. It started off really well and then people started voting for Tom’s car (damn you, master of design), however having said that I almost voted for it. The chrome put me off a bit.
