3 ms·
Adding to this and using some every day examples. Why are expensive "sports cars" almost always ugly (Bright yellow or neon green??). One would think if you h
by kennend3 4y ago
Adding to this and using some every day examples.
Why are expensive "sports cars" almost always ugly (Bright yellow or neon green??).
One would think if you had that sort of money you would realize that a bright green car is tacky as F, but that is the point. To turn heads - this is why they bought the car in the first place.
Why are most cars not coloured like this - because it is ugly and most people don't drive a bright green "Honda civic" so people can look at them.
On the housing front almost every city has bylaws and restrictions on what you can and cant do. In the US you also have HOA's with even more restrictions.
As an example - I live in what was formerly a small village . In order to "preserve the heritage" of the area everything is architecturally controlled.
Developers always need to submit your plans for review, but this area is further restricted and has its own set of "rules" outlined in a 34 page document which is on top of the city guidelines.
So all the houses in this area look similar regardless of age by design. There are houses from the 1800's a few blocks away and my house which was built in 2000 fits in just fine from the exterior view. The interior is a different matter because it is not controlled and so it uses modern techniques like steel I-beams.
- lambdasquirrel 4y agoIt's kind of weird, this juxtaposition between sports cars that are ugly as an intention of being eye-catching, and then HOAs that enforce oppressive-ugliness-by-way-of-cookie-cutter-blandness. No matter which way we go it still turns out ugly. On the latter, it's this weird and horrific attempt to mimic the way that buildings in Europe just fit well with each other, even when they use bright colors. In suburban America it seems that's not possible without painting a dystopian look all over the town. Some folks will make an argument that modernism is the cause. Or that post-modernism is the cause. Or whatever is the current style is the cause. I don't buy it because there are works by Frank Lloyd Wright and Mies van der Rohe that are widely considered to be beautiful and which strike the eye. Going the other way, I've met folks who just don't like Impression. So there's aesthetics, and then there's taste. That quote by H.L. Mencken seems appropriate.
- throwaway82388 4y agoThe question about cars is largely one of personality. Who drives bland cars? People who feel social pressure to not stand out, possibly who feel powerless, or who appreciate anonymity. Who drives flashy cars? People who feel important, who feel in control of their own circumstances and image, who think of themselves as iconoclastic.
- crazygringo 4y agoFunny, I couldn't disagree more. When I think of "people who feel important, who feel in control of their own circumstances and image" I think of people who choose understated cars, because they're confident in themselves and have nothing to prove or compensate for by feeling the need to show off flashy colors. But when I think of people who are insecure and not getting enough emotional approval elsewhere in their lives -- isn't that the "stereotypical" flashy-car owner? When you look at high-powered execs in Manhattan -- who feel very important and very in control -- they're not the ones in flashy-colored cars.
- throwaway82388 4y agoThat stereotypical insecure sportscar owner is certainly real. But not every one of them is insecure. Some just feel like they’ve won and deserve the spoils. And of course there are far more variables than I listed. I was just making some sweeping generalizations. I’ve met both. Old money, true to stereotype, tend to drive inconspicuous cars. I’m not old money, but I do the same.