O'Rourke has it about right...great, thoughtful article from the WSJ

[RKC]

The End of the Affair
The fate of Detroit isn’t a matter of economics. It’s a tragic romance, whose magic was killed by bureaucrats, bad taste and busybodies. P.J. O’Rourke on why Americans fell out of love with the automobile.
By P.J. O’ROURKE

The phrase “bankrupt General Motors,” which we expect to hear uttered on Monday, leaves Americans my age in economic shock. The words are as melodramatic as “Mom’s nude photos.” And, indeed, if we want to understand what doomed the American automobile, we should give up on economics and turn to melodrama.

Politicians, journalists, financial analysts and other purveyors of banality have been looking at cars as if a convertible were a business. Fire the MBAs and hire a poet. The fate of Detroit isn’t a matter of financial crisis, foreign competition, corporate greed, union intransigence, energy costs or measuring the shoe size of the footprints in the carbon. It’s a tragic romance—unleashed passions, titanic clashes, lost love and wild horses.

Foremost are the horses. Cars can’t be comprehended without them. A hundred and some years ago Rudyard Kipling wrote “The Ballad of the King’s Jest,” in which an Afghan tribesman avers: Four things greater than all things are,—Women and Horses and Power and War.

Insert another “power” after the horse and the verse was as true in the suburbs of my 1950s boyhood as it was in the Khyber Pass.

Horsepower is not a quaint leftover of linguistics or a vague metaphoric anachronism. James Watt, father of the steam engine and progenitor of the industrial revolution, lacked a measurement for the movement of weight over distance in time—what we call energy. (What we call energy wasn’t even an intellectual concept in the late 18th century—in case you think the recent collapse of global capitalism was history’s most transformative moment.) Mr. Watt did research using draft animals and found that, under optimal conditions, a dray horse could lift 33,000 pounds one foot off the ground in one minute. Mr. Watt—the eponymous watt not yet existing—called this unit of energy “1 horse-power.”

In 1970 a Pontiac GTO (may the brand name rest in peace) had horsepower to the number of 370. In the time of one minute, for the space of one foot, it could move 12,210,000 pounds. And it could move those pounds down every foot of every mile of all the roads to the ends of the earth for every minute of every hour until the driver nodded off at the wheel. Forty years ago the pimply kid down the block, using $3,500 in saved-up soda-jerking money, procured might and main beyond the wildest dreams of Genghis Khan, whose hordes went forth to pillage mounted upon less oomph than is in a modern leaf blower.

Horses and horsepower alike are about status and being cool. A knight in ancient Rome was bluntly called “guy on horseback,” Equesitis. Chevalier means the same, as does Cavalier. Lose the capitalization and the dictionary says, “insouciant and debonair; marked by a lofty disregard of others’ interests, rights, or feelings; high-handed and arrogant and supercilious.” How cool is that? Then there are cowboys—always cool—and the U.S. cavalry that coolly comes to their rescue plus the proverbially cool-handed “Man on Horseback” to whom we turn in troubled times.

Early witnesses to the automobile urged motorists to get a horse. But that, in effect, was what the automobile would do—get a horse for everybody. Once the Model T was introduced in 1908 we all became Sir Lancelot, gained a seat at the Round Table and were privileged to joust for the favors of fair maidens (at drive-in movies). The pride and prestige of a noble mount was vouchsafed to the common man. And woman, too. No one ever tried to persuade ladies to drive sidesaddle with both legs hanging out the car door.

For the purpose of ennobling us schlubs, the car is better than the horse in every way. Even more advantageous than cost, convenience and not getting kicked and smelly is how much easier it is to drive than to ride. I speak with feeling on this subject, having taken up riding when I was nearly 60 and having begun to drive when I was so small that my cousin Tommy had to lie on the transmission hump and operate the accelerator and the brake with his hands.

After the grown-ups had gone to bed, Tommy and I shifted the Buick into neutral, pushed it down the driveway and out of earshot, started the engine and toured the neighborhood. The sheer difficulty of horsemanship can be illustrated by what happened to Tommy and me next. Nothing. We maneuvered the car home, turned it off and rolled it back up the driveway. (We were raised in the blessedly flat Midwest.) During our foray the Buick’s speedometer reached 30. But 30 miles per hour is a full gallop on a horse. Delete what you’ve seen of horse riding in movies. Possibly a kid who’d never been on a horse could ride at a gallop without killing himself. Possibly one of the Jonas Brothers could land an F-14 on a carrier deck.

Thus cars usurped the place of horses in our hearts. Once we’d caught a glimpse of a well-turned Goodyear, checked out the curves of the bodywork and gaped at that swell pair of headlights, well, the old gray mare was not what she used to be. We embarked upon life in the fast lane with our new paramour. It was a great love story of man and machine. The road to the future was paved with bliss.

Then we got married and moved to the suburbs. Being away from central cities meant Americans had to spend more of their time driving. Over the years away got farther away. Eventually this meant that Americans had to spend all of their time driving. The play date was 40 miles from the Chuck E. Cheese. The swim meet was 40 miles from the cello lesson. The Montessori was 40 miles from the math coach. Mom’s job was 40 miles from Dad’s job and the three-car garage was 40 miles from both.

The car ceased to be object of desire and equipment for adventure and turned into office, rec room, communications hub, breakfast nook and recycling bin—a motorized cup holder. Americans, the richest people on Earth, were stuck in the confines of their crossover SUVs, squeezed into less space than tech-support call-center employees in a Mumbai cubicle farm. Never mind the six-bedroom, eight-bath, pseudo-Tudor with cathedral-ceilinged great room and 1,000-bottle controlled-climate wine cellar. That was a day’s walk away.

We became sick and tired of our cars and even angry at them. Pointy-headed busybodies of the environmentalist, new urbanist, utopian communitarian ilk blamed the victim. They claimed the car had forced us to live in widely scattered settlements in the great wasteland of big-box stores and the Olive Garden. If we would all just get on our Schwinns or hop a trolley, they said, America could become an archipelago of cozy gulags on the Portland, Ore., model with everyone nestled together in the most sustainably carbon-neutral, diverse and ecologically unimpactful way,

But cars didn’t shape our existence; cars let us escape with our lives. We’re way the heck out here in Valley Bottom Heights and Trout Antler Estates because we were at war with the cities. We fought rotten public schools, idiot municipal bureaucracies, corrupt political machines, rampant criminality and the pointy-headed busybodies. Cars gave us our dragoons and hussars, lent us speed and mobility, let us scout the terrain and probe the enemy’s lines. And thanks to our cars, when we lost the cities we weren’t forced to surrender, we were able to retreat.

But our poor cars paid the price. They were flashing swords beaten into dull plowshares. Cars became appliances. Or worse. Nobody’s ticked off at the dryer or the dishwasher, much less the fridge. We recognize these as labor-saving devices. The car, on the other hand, seems to create labor. We hold the car responsible for all the dreary errands to which it needs to be steered. Hell, a golf cart’s more fun. You can ride around in a golf cart with a six-pack, safe from breathalyzers, chasing Canada geese on the fairways and taking swings at gophers with a mashie.

We’ve lost our love for cars and forgotten our debt to them and meanwhile the pointy-headed busybodies have been exacting their revenge. We escaped the poke of their noses once, when we lived downtown, but we won’t be able to peel out so fast the next time. In the name of safety, emissions control and fuel economy, the simple mechanical elegance of the automobile has been rendered ponderous, cumbersome and incomprehensible. One might as well pry the back off an iPod as pop the hood on a contemporary motor vehicle. An aging shade-tree mechanic like myself stares aghast and sits back down in the shade. Or would if the car weren’t squawking at me like a rehearsal for divorce. You left the key in. You left the door open. You left the lights on. You left your dirty socks in the middle of the bedroom floor.

[RKC]

Part II

I don’t believe the pointy-heads give a damn about climate change or gas mileage, much less about whether I survive a head-on with one of their tax-sucking mass-transit projects. All they want to is to make me hate my car. How proud and handsome would Bucephalas look, or Traveler or Rachel Alexandra, with seat and shoulder belts, air bags, 5-mph bumpers and a maze of pollution-control equipment under the tail?

And there’s the end of the American automobile industry. When it comes to dull, practical, ugly things that bore and annoy me, Japanese things cost less and the cup holders are more conveniently located.

The American automobile is—that is, was—never a product of Japanese-style industrialism. America’s steel, coal, beer, beaver pelts and PCs may have come from our business plutocracy, but American cars have been manufactured mostly by romantic fools. David Buick, Ransom E. Olds, Louis Chevrolet, Robert and Louis Hupp of the Hupmobile, the Dodge brothers, the Studebaker brothers, the Packard brothers, the Duesenberg brothers, Charles W. Nash, E. L. Cord, John North Willys, Preston Tucker and William H. Murphy, whose Cadillac cars were designed by the young Henry Ford, all went broke making cars. The man who founded General Motors in 1908, William Crapo (really) Durant, went broke twice. Henry Ford, of course, did not go broke, nor was he a romantic, but judging by his opinions he certainly was a fool.

America’s romantic foolishness with cars is finished, however, or nearly so. In the far boondocks a few good old boys haven’t got the memo and still tear up the back roads. Doubtless the Obama administration’s Department of Transportation is even now calculating a way to tap federal stimulus funds for mandatory OnStar installations to locate and subdue these reprobates.

Among certain youths—often first-generation Americans—there remains a vestigial fondness for Chevelle low-riders or Honda “tuners.” The pointy-headed busybodies have yet to enfold these youngsters in the iron-clad conformity of cultural diversity’s embrace. Soon the kids will be expressing their creative energy in a more constructive way, planting bok choy in community gardens and decorating homeless shelters with murals of Che.

I myself have something old-school under a tarp in the basement garage. I bet when my will has been probated, some child of mine will yank the dust cover and use the proceeds of the eBay sale to buy a mountain bike. Four things greater than all things are, and I’m pretty sure one of them isn’t bicycles. There are those of us who have had the good fortune to meet with strength and beauty, with majestic force in which we were willing to trust our lives. Then a day comes, that strength and beauty fails, and a man does what a man has to do. I’m going downstairs to put a bullet in a V-8.

[pwd72s]

Sure has a way with words, doesn't he?

[jyl]

Long on poetry, short on reasoning.

How is it that Japanese car companies have thrived, that Korean companies have built themselves into contendors, that the best European companies have stayed at the top of their game? Without $3500 Camaros, indeed.

[Jim Richards]

Originally Posted by jyl

long on poetry, short on reasoning.

+1.

[RKC]

I'm not sure it is supposed to be about reasoning, or that poetry is misplaced. I was born in the midwest, grew up in San Diego, and live in Chicago. I have always loved cars, and my dad, either before I was born or during my early life, owned a TR-3, an original Mustang Conv., and two RX-7s and two Mercedes SL's. My grandfather was born in Sacramento, CA, and told me stories about driving a Model T back and forth for about 2 weeks each summer to attend Ohio State - with constant punctured tires, various mechanical troubles, etc.

I still feel what cars were to people in 1920 and onward - the freedom to roam the country in my grandfather's case, the freedom to explore the world in sports cars in my dad's and my case.

I didn't experience (and don't particularly crave) a Muscle Car. But I appreciate that they were built here. I have been to the Auburn/Cord/Duesenberg Museum, and those cars were certainly world class during their era. And to feel all this and to know that Chrysler has filed and GM is going to hurts me inside as an American - even though I own a 911 and don't think much of most American cars - it hurts me and bothers me, much the same way I'll bet an Englishman hurts at the loss of all his brands to the various corners of the earth. We are losing something important. Maybe not something critical, but something important, and that makes me sad.

Maybe O'Rourke is right, and that some of what he says is why most people don't appreciate our passion for cars, our romanticism about travel, and that these declines had to happen in order to bring about what's next. But it still saddens me to see GM go under.....

You guys, who obviously love cars, seem to mostly not care, and just want to kick GM for this problem or that problem. And I agree to a point - yes, they should fail, no I don't want to bail them out. But, as a purely, mom, apple-pie, knee-jerk American, I think the bankruptcy filing of GM is tragic. Did they bring it on themselves? Did they display hubris? Carelessness? Weakness? Vanity? Sure. But man, it bothers me that they are going bankrupt....a powerful, wealthy company, with tens of thousands of employees over a period of 40-50 years can't turn it around....what a shame....

[jyl]

The romance of the open road etc etc still exists, but in most places it is buried under gridlocked eight-lane freeways and cookie-cutter suburban streets leading to endless parking lots.

As for GM, don't be writing it's obituary. The company will emerge from BK in a couple of months, minus excess plants, brands, and workers, with enough cash to make a comeback. Then, it'll be up to the cars.

The other American car company, Ford, is probably going to make it through this and emerge stronger. It already has the cars - almost, and getting closer every model year.

Chrysler, I don't know about. Maybe Fiat can make a go of them.

[strupgolf]

But it sure was fun with my '69 Z-28, open headers, racing tires, going through the slalom course and beating the clock. I know at least I had fun when the fun was to be had. And then I drove the car home.

[m21sniper]

There is at least one GM, Ford or Chrysler product from every decade since the 50s i would love to have.

[RKC]

There is at least one GM, Ford or Chrysler product from every decade since the 50s i would love to have.


Agree - even can think of a Studebaker that interests me (the Hawk - I'd post a photo, but they look terrible in photos - split, Enzo-like fenders, three or four different cars thrown together; however, in person, it really works for me - I saw one at a car show last year and it really looked great).

[the]

Originally Posted by jyl

Long on poetry, short on reasoning.

How is it that Japanese car companies have thrived, that Korean companies have built themselves into contendors, that the best European companies have stayed at the top of their game? Without $3500 Camaros, indeed.

It's not short on reasoning at all.

The Japanese car makers have thrived - thus far - because they have built the better appliances.

[pwd72s]

Originally Posted by the

It's not short on reasoning at all.

The Japanese car makers have thrived - thus far - because they have built the better appliances.

Truth...appliances. Precious few of these appliances get the blood pumping. When I think Japanese exciting cars for the masses? Well, there are the Z's, and then there are...uh...uh...uh, c'mon, help me out here...

[jyl]

RX-7
240/280/300Z
NSX
Miata
S2000
2000GT
Skyline
MR2/Turbo
Integra R
3000GT
WRX and Lancer
Supra/Celica
and lots more prosiac models that the Jap tuner kids do a lot with. Muscle cars started as regular family sedans with a lot of engine. A blown and tuned Civic is the same concept, but relevant to today.

[Mo_Gearhead]

O'Rourke is just waxing nostalgic for 'what once was'.

Anyone that is his (my) age watched it all progress from the days of our youth
(1950's), when you could still determine a car's identity from a 1/8 mile away by its grille design; through the muscle car years, to the gas crisis, until cup holders became more important than reliability or quality.

The world has indeed, shifted on its axis. With automotive CEO's chasing the next quarters profit numbers and negotiating for their personal 'Golden Parachutes' instead of seeing the invading hoards from Japan, Germany, etc. as actual competition ...they soon sealed their own fate.

[Jim Richards]

Most American buy "appliances."

[KaptKaos]

I was thinking about this article this morning. O'Rourke touches on a few really important points here.

In my opinion, he misses the biggest question. What is there to love about new American cars? Let's leave the Corvette, Viper, Ford GT and that funky Caddy convertible (nee Corvette) out of it. What is there left to love?

[jyl]

Even in the heyday of Detroit, most of its cars were pedestrian commuter mobiles. Nothing you'd "love". There was that "new model every year" excitement that Madison Ave drummed up, but the typical 1960s Chevy was just a car, and the next year was just a used car, and ended up in a junkyard.

[Mo_Gearhead]

Quote: "What is there left to love?"

____________________

I will LOVE it when every pointy-headed-retard owns one of these and are confined to the right lane:



Thighs rubbing against their passenger, kids in the back seat; their warm breath on daddy's neck as the cry, " There's NO ROOM back here!"

As they eventually crash into one another/larger trucks/suvs/etc.

...it will become a sort of retro-active abortion scenario.

Perfect.

[pwd72s]

"America’s romantic foolishness with cars is finished, however, or nearly so. In the far boondocks a few good old boys haven’t got the memo and still tear up the back roads. Doubtless the Obama administration’s Department of Transportation is even now calculating a way to tap federal stimulus funds for mandatory OnStar installations to locate and subdue these reprobates." From the above essay...

But...But...Oregon's Governor and those pushing GPS units in all cars here say this is ONLY to be used for collecting a mileage based roads tax. A Governor wouldn't lie to us, would he?

[sammyg2]

Originally Posted by jyl

long on poetry, short on reasoning.

How is it that japanese car companies have thrived, that korean companies have built themselves into contendors, that the best european companies have stayed at the top of their game? Without $3500 camaros, indeed.

u ..... A .... W ...!