I know bullshit when I see it. I’m a wine writer, after all, and wine writers have perpetrated some of the most pretentious nonsense ever committed to paper. But I sense a serious challenge coming from the motor industry. Fairfax NZ motoring editor Dave Moore recently wrote a piece about the new-look Ford Territory, in which he quotes from what I presume to be a Ford press release waxing eloquently about something called “kinetic design language”.
Moore quotes Ford designer Chris Svensson as saying: “Kinetic design comprises several specific elements, all of which are present in the new Territory.” [Now here’s the bit I like.] “They are confident stance, dynamic lines, expressive form language, taut surfacing, bold graphics and great detailing.”
Confident stance? Expressive form language? Taut surfacing? Pass the sick bag.
I’ve noticed an increasing tendency lately for motoring writers to resort to the sort of esoteric language normally seen only in reviews of contemporary poetry books and abstract art exhibitions, but this marks a step up. Even as one fluent in the pompous dialect known as winespeak, I’m not sure I can compete at this level.
3 comments:
Right on the mark.
But, have you recognised the same happening in political reporting? "News" from the political front these days is more often than not nothing more than parrotted imitation of well masticated PR gibberish. The rot started here in NZ with Muldoon and his press conferences. Remember the toy-tossing over Tom Scott?
Think of drinking a wash from ten-day-old leys of a good pinot in place of the real thing. That is the general standard of political reporting these days.
I like 'confident stance'. The car is a man. A real, sophisticated man. And the car knows it.
'dynamic lines' is straight out of the design bullshit handbook. Snore.
As for 'taut surfacing', better leave that to each reader's individual (private) imagination.
:):) Y'know Santiago, that if you went back only 30 years cars were all women. "She...".
Pity that changed.
Post a Comment