RE: 2023 BMW XM | PH Review
Discussion
GeeTeeBee said:
biggbn said:
As I've said before, I like it. By the way, I'm a middle aged school teacher with what most label left wing politics. I wear what I like and drive what I like and I'd have that over a new range rover or the like any day. I hardly fit the ostentatious attention seeker stereotype so many seem so keen to attribute. I'm sure everyone flinging that brand of mud has impeccable taste in everything and/or simply wear hair shorts and clogs whilst driving base Pandas everywhere because 'that's all you really need isn't it? '
Whatever it is you like about it doesn't dictate the likely majority customer profile. You and others can, if you want, make any claims you like in that regard. But that doesn't make them plausible.Insofar as there can be said to be a concept of ostentatiousness, this car is clearly designed to deliver on that. It's a soft concept that largely defies expedient objective metrics, of course, so in the context of a 'debate' like this, it's possible to superficially contradict the bleedin' obvious and pretend you've got a point. Nobody can link to a peer reviewed paper correlating this car with attention seeking naffness to 12 decimal places.
But, equally, nobody remotely rational is buying it.
It's also pretty obviously a logical fallacy to imply that only those with immaculate taste are in a position to identify aesthetic crassness. This thing is off the charts. You don't need to be Brian Sewell and Loyd Grosmann's lovechuld to spot the XM is intergalactically gauche.
Most of us have a soft spot for the odd naff thing. Which is fine. What makes for a bad look is trying to pretend whatever it is isn't naff when it very obviously is. Far better to own it.
I would also argue there IS some validity in making the point that those criticising it's styling by criticising those who like the thing must have impeccable taste and only drove what they need. Their linguistic machinations in purporting to be singular arbitrers of taste and style DOES suggest they must be impeccable and above criticism. Had they worded their posts ' I think it's ugly but each to their own ' as a minority have, they would not leave themselves open to being labelled absolutist in their judgement, they would leave some room for the fact everyone is different, and that is to be celebrated. I do not care what others drive, or like, more power to them I say. What we wear, drive etc is I guess an extension of our free will, representative of an existential awareness that we flaunt or hide behind.
Intersting discussion and thanks for your input, it is both valued and valuable. Peace and love, gbn x
04helipilot said:
That is aimed for the American market surely ?
Definitely. All this talk of China doesn't add up IMO as when I used to go there, pre covid, saloons were the order of the day, not SUVs. That may have changed since, I don't know. Aesthetics aside, I struggle with a BMW at this price point. I just don't see the brand has enough premium to warrant a six figure price tag.
unpc said:
04helipilot said:
That is aimed for the American market surely ?
Definitely. All this talk of China doesn't add up IMO as when I used to go there, pre covid, saloons were the order of the day, not SUVs. That may have changed since, I don't know. Aesthetics aside, I struggle with a BMW at this price point. I just don't see the brand has enough premium to warrant a six figure price tag.
samoht said:
It's the new Canyonero Hybrid ! The Ultimate Squirrel-Squashin', Deer-Smackin' Driving Machine.
Can you name the truck with four wheel drive,smells like a steak and seats thirty-five..
Canyonero! Canyonero!
Well, it goes real slow with the hammer down,
It's the country-fried truck endorsed by a clown!
Canyonero! (Yah!) Canyonero!
[Krusty:] Hey Hey
The Federal Highway commission has ruled the
Canyonero unsafe for highway or city driving.
Canyonero!
12 yards long, 2 lanes wide,
65 tons of American Pride!
Canyonero! Canyonero!
Top of the line in utility sports,
Unexplained fires are a matter for the courts!
Canyonero! Canyonero! (Yah!)
She blinds everybody with her super high beams,
She's a squirrel crushing, deer smacking, driving machine!
Canyonero!-oh woah, Canyonero! (Yah!)
Drive Canyonero!
Woah Canyonero!
Woah!
biggbn said:
Yet vehicles of this type CANT be pretty, there are no traditional good looking ones, and I would argue that one can be attracted to somethings aesthetics without it having an ounce of traditional beauty. Jean Francois Lyotard posited that any piece of art has a latent, innate energy that is only ignited when it is looked at. We can't help want we like, we jist like it. For the type of vehicle I think it's a great design. It is brutal, blunt edged and doesn't 'do' styling in an attempt to soften its image in the laughable way so many vehicles of this type try to. Its honesty of design is what appeals to me, and no matter how others try to dress that up as an ostentatious wish to be noticed, I just like it, it's that simple.
I would also argue there IS some validity in making the point that those criticising it's styling by criticising those who like the thing must have impeccable taste and only drove what they need. Their linguistic machinations in purporting to be singular arbitrers of taste and style DOES suggest they must be impeccable and above criticism. Had they worded their posts ' I think it's ugly but each to their own ' as a minority have, they would not leave themselves open to being labelled absolutist in their judgement, they would leave some room for the fact everyone is different, and that is to be celebrated. I do not care what others drive, or like, more power to them I say. What we wear, drive etc is I guess an extension of our free will, representative of an existential awareness that we flaunt or hide behind.
Intersting discussion and thanks for your input, it is both valued and valuable. Peace and love, gbn x
Your first point is legitimate and well put, it just doesn't apply to the vast majority of the customer base. Nor, I'd argue, was it instrumental in BMW's thinking.I would also argue there IS some validity in making the point that those criticising it's styling by criticising those who like the thing must have impeccable taste and only drove what they need. Their linguistic machinations in purporting to be singular arbitrers of taste and style DOES suggest they must be impeccable and above criticism. Had they worded their posts ' I think it's ugly but each to their own ' as a minority have, they would not leave themselves open to being labelled absolutist in their judgement, they would leave some room for the fact everyone is different, and that is to be celebrated. I do not care what others drive, or like, more power to them I say. What we wear, drive etc is I guess an extension of our free will, representative of an existential awareness that we flaunt or hide behind.
Intersting discussion and thanks for your input, it is both valued and valuable. Peace and love, gbn x
Your second is not, ultimately, sustainable. In practice, it puts an end to any notion of ostentation or vulgarity. If you are right, nothing is vulgar or ostentatious and the concepts themselves are fictitious...
Personally, I think that's empty sophistry of zero value in a real world in which vulgarity and ostentation very much do exist. The fact that we can't all agree on exactly what qualifies doesn't mean they don't exist any more than the fact that we can't all agree on what is beautiful means nothing is beautiful and the concept has no meaning.
Inevitably, there's a lot of grey area with this stuff. Arguably, the bulk of things that might or might not be vulgar or ostentatious fall into that grey area. But at the extreme ends of the scale, the sort of relativism you're arguing for ends up making all subjective notions meaningless.
BIK rate will dictate how well this car sells. There's a reason Porsche are stuggling to keep up with demand of the Taycan and its not because every powerfully built company director is dying to get in to an electric car to save the planet or cares about fuel consumption. Its premium, big, brash and poweful, get the BIK right and they will sell tons of them. Nothing else matters.
GeeTeeBee said:
biggbn said:
Yet vehicles of this type CANT be pretty, there are no traditional good looking ones, and I would argue that one can be attracted to somethings aesthetics without it having an ounce of traditional beauty. Jean Francois Lyotard posited that any piece of art has a latent, innate energy that is only ignited when it is looked at. We can't help want we like, we jist like it. For the type of vehicle I think it's a great design. It is brutal, blunt edged and doesn't 'do' styling in an attempt to soften its image in the laughable way so many vehicles of this type try to. Its honesty of design is what appeals to me, and no matter how others try to dress that up as an ostentatious wish to be noticed, I just like it, it's that simple.
I would also argue there IS some validity in making the point that those criticising it's styling by criticising those who like the thing must have impeccable taste and only drove what they need. Their linguistic machinations in purporting to be singular arbitrers of taste and style DOES suggest they must be impeccable and above criticism. Had they worded their posts ' I think it's ugly but each to their own ' as a minority have, they would not leave themselves open to being labelled absolutist in their judgement, they would leave some room for the fact everyone is different, and that is to be celebrated. I do not care what others drive, or like, more power to them I say. What we wear, drive etc is I guess an extension of our free will, representative of an existential awareness that we flaunt or hide behind.
Intersting discussion and thanks for your input, it is both valued and valuable. Peace and love, gbn x
Your first point is legitimate and well put, it just doesn't apply to the vast majority of the customer base. Nor, I'd argue, was it instrumental in BMW's thinking.I would also argue there IS some validity in making the point that those criticising it's styling by criticising those who like the thing must have impeccable taste and only drove what they need. Their linguistic machinations in purporting to be singular arbitrers of taste and style DOES suggest they must be impeccable and above criticism. Had they worded their posts ' I think it's ugly but each to their own ' as a minority have, they would not leave themselves open to being labelled absolutist in their judgement, they would leave some room for the fact everyone is different, and that is to be celebrated. I do not care what others drive, or like, more power to them I say. What we wear, drive etc is I guess an extension of our free will, representative of an existential awareness that we flaunt or hide behind.
Intersting discussion and thanks for your input, it is both valued and valuable. Peace and love, gbn x
Your second is not, ultimately, sustainable. In practice, it puts an end to any notion of ostentation or vulgarity. If you are right, nothing is vulgar or ostentatious and the concepts themselves are fictitious...
Personally, I think that's empty sophistry of zero value in a real world in which vulgarity and ostentation very much do exist. The fact that we can't all agree on exactly what qualifies doesn't mean they don't exist any more than the fact that we can't all agree on what is beautiful means nothing is beautiful and the concept has no meaning.
Inevitably, there's a lot of grey area with this stuff. Arguably, the bulk of things that might or might not be vulgar or ostentatious fall into that grey area. But at the extreme ends of the scale, the sort of relativism you're arguing for ends up making all subjective notions meaningless.
Everything we view we do so through parameters created by our own lived life, and just as history creates the lens through which it is itself viewed, so does our own history create our own ability to arbitrate definite decisions on aesthetics. How much have cultural norms defined what does and doesn't look right over the years? Things that sell well are usually loosely described as 'good', certainly attractive and something to aspire to. This leads to a normative acceptance of a template that applies to everything from physiques to paintings, sculptures to statues. But how much do their creators aspire to create something beautiful and therefore acceptable without pondering for a second on IF what they make is in fact beautiful? We strive to appeal to everyone and this ends up with cliches being passed of as beauty, its a form of populist aesthetics and like anything populist is fraught with danger.
Anyhow, fascinating conversation and why I love PH so many things can pop up out of nowhere, veer off down tangential blind alleys and be debated into the night with neither party being able to claim a 'victory' but both feeling as if they have participated in something meaningful. Thanks again man, have a great evening, gbn
biggbn said:
Everything we view we do so through parameters created by our own lived life, and just as history creates the lens through which it is itself viewed, so does our own history create our own ability to arbitrate definite decisions on aesthetics. How much have cultural norms defined what does and doesn't look right over the years? Things that sell well are usually loosely described as 'good', certainly attractive and something to aspire to. This leads to a normative acceptance of a template that applies to everything from physiques to paintings, sculptures to statues. But how much do their creators aspire to create something beautiful and therefore acceptable without pondering for a second on IF what they make is in fact beautiful? We strive to appeal to everyone and this ends up with cliches being passed of as beauty, its a form of populist aesthetics and like anything populist is fraught with danger.
Really interesting thought. On the subject, see Roland Barthes' work on semiology. He even analysis the design of the Citroen DS on that basis in Mythologies.http://www.citroenet.org.uk/passenger-cars/micheli...
Edited by nickfrog on Monday 20th March 21:11
nickfrog said:
GeeTeeBee said:
nickfrog said:
I am retired so I don't aspire to any careers. I think that past a Dacia who are all guilty of conspicuous material consumption. Where do you draw the line?
Everyone gets to draw the line wherever they want. My line is several parsecs short of this crass, attention seeking heap. More power to you if it resonates with your personality, though.I am simply finding it easy to accept that different people like different things and are on different budgets and I find it difficult to be intolerant and hateful and to make moral judgements about other people's consumption choices (particularly when I don't know them), when by and large we are all guilty. Live and let live.
Edited by nickfrog on Monday 20th March 16:43
J-P said:
Completely agree with you Nick. I personally don't like the way this car looks but far more disappointing to me, is the fact that's it's not great to drive but I certainly wouldn't judge an individual who absolutely loves this car for whatever reason. As you rightly say "live and let live".
Hiya JP, hope you're well. When is you CS coming? Must be soon?J-P said:
nickfrog said:
GeeTeeBee said:
nickfrog said:
I am retired so I don't aspire to any careers. I think that past a Dacia who are all guilty of conspicuous material consumption. Where do you draw the line?
Everyone gets to draw the line wherever they want. My line is several parsecs short of this crass, attention seeking heap. More power to you if it resonates with your personality, though.I am simply finding it easy to accept that different people like different things and are on different budgets and I find it difficult to be intolerant and hateful and to make moral judgements about other people's consumption choices (particularly when I don't know them), when by and large we are all guilty. Live and let live.
Edited by nickfrog on Monday 20th March 16:43
I'm also confused. We have "this car is for people with micro penises" because someone posted an article about the view of men with SPORTS cars /not SUVs), and the cliche is that these cars are driven by mums doing the school run.....
nickfrog said:
J-P said:
Completely agree with you Nick. I personally don't like the way this car looks but far more disappointing to me, is the fact that's it's not great to drive but I certainly wouldn't judge an individual who absolutely loves this car for whatever reason. As you rightly say "live and let live".
Hiya JP, hope you're well. When is you CS coming? Must be soon?
E90_M3Ross said:
J-P said:
nickfrog said:
GeeTeeBee said:
nickfrog said:
I am retired so I don't aspire to any careers. I think that past a Dacia who are all guilty of conspicuous material consumption. Where do you draw the line?
Everyone gets to draw the line wherever they want. My line is several parsecs short of this crass, attention seeking heap. More power to you if it resonates with your personality, though.I am simply finding it easy to accept that different people like different things and are on different budgets and I find it difficult to be intolerant and hateful and to make moral judgements about other people's consumption choices (particularly when I don't know them), when by and large we are all guilty. Live and let live.
Edited by nickfrog on Monday 20th March 16:43
I'm also confused. We have "this car is for people with micro penises" because someone posted an article about the view of men with SPORTS cars /not SUVs), and the cliche is that these cars are driven by mums doing the school run.....
E90_M3Ross said:
100%.
I'm also confused. We have "this car is for people with micro penises" because someone posted an article about the view of men with SPORTS cars /not SUVs), and the cliche is that these cars are driven by mums doing the school run.....
Well it's a fluid world now you know from a gender point of view. I'm also confused. We have "this car is for people with micro penises" because someone posted an article about the view of men with SPORTS cars /not SUVs), and the cliche is that these cars are driven by mums doing the school run.....
nickfrog said:
E90_M3Ross said:
100%.
I'm also confused. We have "this car is for people with micro penises" because someone posted an article about the view of men with SPORTS cars /not SUVs), and the cliche is that these cars are driven by mums doing the school run.....
Well it's a fluid world now you know from a gender point of view. I'm also confused. We have "this car is for people with micro penises" because someone posted an article about the view of men with SPORTS cars /not SUVs), and the cliche is that these cars are driven by mums doing the school run.....
good one!Saw one in Munich on Saturday night, it stuck out because of the huge illuminated grille but it did seem to be garnering a lot of attention, not sure whether good or bad but I suspect that will be just fine with the likely owner demographic. I suspect the lack of driving dynamics won't phase them either but upsetting a legion of M enthusiasts in the process and playing fast and loose with your supposed M(otorsport) heritage does seem short-sighted.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff