Piston Slap: A Primer of Automotive Anthropomorphism?

Sajeev Mehta
by Sajeev Mehta
Mister Steve writes:Sajeev:There seems to be a trend, at least among the younger crop of auto writers, to anthropomorphize an automobile based on its looks. It seems like you can barely get through a review of a new car without mention of automotive anthropomorphism: “angry eyes” or “ugly mouth” to describe styling. Definitely not how I recall descriptions from the likes of David E. Davis, Jr. or Chubby Chedder.My theory for this is that they’re the generation that grew up during the Cars movie franchise. Seeing as I’m one of the “olds” who grew up when this wasn’t a thing, I could be wrong.Sajeev answers:As someone with a love/hate relationship with this profession, whose interaction with David E. Davis proves you should never meet your heroes, I doubt they’d do any better. But I digress…Automotive anthropomorphism has multiple origins, and the Cars movie is valid for the modern era. You might recall how folks in the ’50s (i.e. men) made Dagmar references and comments like “the ‘slant-eye’ face was particularly jarring” that’d now be considered racist.I still use a phrase from my school yard to describe automotive posteriors with terrible visibility and tiny cargo apertures: if I judged, I’d clearly need to look at the man in the mirror.Perhaps this is a vicious cycle?But here’s the thing about styling: it adapts to new technology (like any other industry). Thanks to modern plastics, computer assisted designs, etc., most any grille/headlight shape can pass government standards and conform to a plastic fascia. Cars aren’t architecture-esque any more. The malaise era’s massive chrome bumpers and rectangular headlights are gone, and DIY 3D printed fascia elements aren’t far away.So might as well make cars appear happy to be on the road! Pixar capitalized on these faces but everyone sees it — car designers, too. You could say it’s “by design” (sorry) and I betcha even Mr. Chedder sees it, too. [Image: Shutterstock user topseller]Send your queries to sajeev@thetruthaboutcars.com. Spare no details and ask for a speedy resolution if you’re in a hurry…but be realistic, and use your make/model-specific forums instead of TTAC for more timely advice.
Sajeev Mehta
Sajeev Mehta

More by Sajeev Mehta

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 25 comments
  • JohnTaurus JohnTaurus on Sep 16, 2018

    To me, most cars do have a face, and even those that don't still tend to have a personality regardless. Even relatively bland cars still have something of a look to them. It might not necessarily be pleasant, but its there. I don't see anything wrong with this. And those with a passion for automobiles do tend to personify their cars to a certain extent. I don't mean you name your prized BMW "Sam" or "Charlie", that's rather immature IMO. But when you get attached to it, it does seem to become part of the family. Again, I don't see anything wrong with this. I'm sure that, given a choice, any of us would choose to sacrifice our most beloved vehicle to save a human life. So, its not like we value a machine above flesh and blood, but that doesn't mean we don't care about, or even love, our vehicle(s). I deeply regret getting rid of some of my cars in the past, although some were most definitely not by choice. They became a friend, a trustworthy companion that was/were there for me. They shared the good times, the bad times, and the mundane times, they made life a little better because they were a part of it. But, its not like I sit and cry if I think about them being crushed or whatever. In the end, they were just machines that had no real soul. That doesn't mean they meant nothing, they just made an impression on me that I do miss. I feel more emotion about the death of someone I read about in a news story that I didn't even know. So, what I'm saying is, even if we do personify our cars and think of them as a friend or loved-one, that has its limits. At least, for me.

  • WallMeerkat WallMeerkat on Sep 17, 2018

    I remember reading about the E46 when it was launched, the designer (possibly Bangle?) saying that the front of the car was a face, the headlights were the eyes. If that was bangle, where did it all go wrong? The current breed of crossover SUVs with multiple stacked headlights just look jarring, like a person with 2 pairs of eyes. I grew up, the face of a car was headlight eyes, grille nose, and licenseplate mouth (works better with long european license plates, or a state with front plates). Though the last gen Mazda 3 had that silly smiley emoji mouth.

  • Lou_BC Hard pass
  • TheEndlessEnigma These cars were bought and hooned. This is a bomb waiting to go off in an owner's driveway.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Thankfully I don't have to deal with GDI issues in my Frontier. These cleaners should do well for me if I win.
  • Theflyersfan Serious answer time...Honda used to stand for excellence in auto engineering. Their first main claim to fame was the CVCC (we don't need a catalytic converter!) engine and it sent from there. Their suspensions, their VTEC engines, slick manual transmissions, even a stowing minivan seat, all theirs. But I think they've been coasting a bit lately. Yes, the Civic Type-R has a powerful small engine, but the Honda of old would have found a way to get more revs out of it and make it feel like an i-VTEC engine of old instead of any old turbo engine that can be found in a multitude of performance small cars. Their 1.5L turbo-4...well...have they ever figured out the oil dilution problems? Very un-Honda-like. Paint issues that still linger. Cheaper feeling interior trim. All things that fly in the face of what Honda once was. The only thing that they seem to have kept have been the sales staff that treat you with utter contempt for daring to walk into their inner sanctum and wanting a deal on something that isn't a bare-bones CR-V. So Honda, beat the rest of your Japanese and Korean rivals, and plug-in hybridize everything. If you want a relatively (in an engineering way) easy way to get ahead of the curve, raise the CAFE score, and have a major point to advertise, and be able to sell to those who can't plug in easily, sell them on something that will get, for example, 35% better mileage, plug in when you get a chance, and drives like a Honda. Bring back some of the engineering skills that Honda once stood for. And then start introducing a portfolio of EVs once people are more comfortable with the idea of plugging in. People seeing that they can easily use an EV for their daily errands with the gas engine never starting will eventually sell them on a future EV because that range anxiety will be lessened. The all EV leap is still a bridge too far, especially as recent sales numbers have shown. Baby steps. That's how you win people over.
  • Theflyersfan If this saves (or delays) an expensive carbon brushing off of the valves down the road, I'll take a case. I understand that can be a very expensive bit of scheduled maintenance.
Next