|
Tough Guys and Pretty Boys:
The Cultural Antagonisms of Engineering and Aesthetics in Automotive History
by David Gartman
The
Depression Era Battle for Streamlining
Although Earl's entertainment philosophy gained ground over the engineers'
efficiency at GM and throughout the industry, automobile stylists continued
to face formidable challenges. The years of the Great
Depression were crucial. America’s consumer society
was just getting off the ground when the economy crashed, touching off
renewed class conflict. But business leaders offered the nation a way
out of the crisis--consumer engineering and streamlining.
Believing that the Depression was caused by consumers’ unwillingness,
not inability, to buy, they proposed to apply science and technology
to consumption, making the design and selling of products as rational
and efficient as their production. Streamlining was part of this strategy,
an attempt to use the science of aerodynamics to create advanced, fast-moving
transportation machines that cut effortlessly and efficiently through
the air and stimulated the interest of reluctant consumers.
The automobile was certainly a candidate for improvement through streamlining.
Industry engineers sought to use the science of aerodynamics to
seize full control of auto design back from the encroaching stylists
and turn it once again into a utilitarian activity. During the Depression
the Chrysler Corporation, which was still a stronghold of no-nonsense
auto engineering, took the lead in functional streamlining. In 1934 it
introduced a radically streamlined car, the Airflow,
which was engineered by Fred Zeder, Owen Skelton, and Carl Breer. It
was a marvel of functional engineering, designed from bumper to bumper
for efficiency and safety. The Airflow introduced several revolutionary
engineering innovations: unitary body construction, which made the frame
and body one strong, stress-bearing unit; a new auto geometry that placed
the seats entirely between the axles, making for a smoother ride; and
a sleek, aerodynamically engineered body that reduced the drag coefficient
and saved fuel. But it was a commercial disaster, with poor sales nearly
sending Chrysler into bankruptcy. The problem with the Airflow was not
only that its sloping hood and curving forms departed too radically from
the traditional look of cars. The car’s design was also too reminiscent
of the machines of mass production, to whose ruthless efficiency many
Americans attributed the unemployment of the period. Industry stylists
like Harley Earl jeered the engineers’ failure, and introduced
their own vision of aesthetic streamlining. Although totally conventional
in engineering, these aesthetically streamlined cars, like the 1936
Lincoln Zephyr, had the sleek and exciting look of rounded
airplanes and trains, and they sold extremely well. The stylists again
triumphed, as the aesthetic illusion of technological progress took precedent
over its engineered reality. By the end of the 1930s, Harley Earl had
gained complete control over the design of cars for all of GM’s
divisions, and stylists in other automakers also made inroads into the
power of engineers.
<<Previous Section - Next Section>>
|
|
|
|