I get email...
Wednesday, August 29, 2007 Filed in:
Revolvers, Blog
stuff, Personal
opinions
Monday's post, a
design analysis of the Colt Python, generated a number of
interesting emails - no doubt in part to a mention at
The View
From The Porch.
The general gist of my inbox was of the "I don't think the Python
is the best looking/I think the XXX is better looking" type. I
suspect this is because readers were "coming in late" and hadn't
read Part
One and
Part Two of the series.
This series of articles isn't about what I (or anyone else)
likes, or what we prefer to own.
The idea is to study design with regard to the revolver; to learn
about the aesthetics of industrial design so that we can appreciate
what goes into it, even if we don't happen to like it.
Yes, I like Pythons; I also like the old skinny-barrel S&W "K"
frames, and for different reasons. I appreciate the skill that went
into the design of the Python, a design that could have very easily
(the S&W 686 springs to mind) turned out to be less graceful
than it did. One can admire the skill of the designer, even if one
doesn't care to have an example for him or her self. This can only
happen if one is conversant with the qualities of good
design.
What we like isn't always what's good; this is an important concept
to understand. For instance, the S&W "Bodyguard" series of "J"
frames is - by just about any measure - an unsuccessful design from
a styling standpoint. From any angle, it's an ugly gun. That
doesn't stop me from liking the little things, in the same way that
I like bulldogs - they're so ugly, they're cute!
On the other hand, one can appreciate guns that one doesn't
actually like. I'm not a fan of autoloaders, but that doesn't stop
me from admiring the Ferrari-like lines of the Benelli B-76 (I
consider it to be the best looking autoloader ever made, which is a
little like contending that one has the best deck chair on the
Titanic.) My feelings about Taurus revolvers are almost infamous,
yet I have to admit that the 4" Tracker series is a good styling
exercise (even given the inelegant shape of their triggers.)
Regular readers will have their ability to differentiate between
feeling and appreciation sorely tested in a couple of weeks, when I
present the final article in the series. I suspect than more than a
few of you will be put off by some of the conclusions in it, but
with an open mind - and the background in this series - I think you
will find it challenging, compelling, and perhaps more than a
little instructive. You may still not like what you see, but
(hopefully) you'll understand a bit about why the designers did
what they did.
Stay tuned, and keep those cards and letters coming!
-=[
Grant ]=-