Wheels from Another Time

Cars are iconic masterpieces.  Besides the fact that somehow we have the technology to make four wheels spin in perfect unison, they are also beautiful works of art.  When we think back, especially in recent American times, cars have a certain look based on the period in which they were made.  And the time between the 1960s and the 1980s yielded some of the most strikingly American cars to this day.  But why, when shopping for a car, would you ever consider buying an old car without all the bells and whistles of a modern one?  You’d buy it because classic cars are unique, simple, and they give you a one of a kind identity that you simply cannot achieve with a run-of-the-mill modern car.

Most classic cars are one of a kind. You won't ever have trouble distinguishing your car from the other boring ones sitting in the parking lot. The uniqueness of a classic car is what most people find attractive about them; the fact that no one else on the road is driving the same wheels as you. Also, the changes and modifications you can make to an older car, as a personal statement, are limitless and something you simply can’t opt for with most modern cars.  Think about that special paint job you could give your 1965 Mustang--a candy apple red, or racing stripes, or flames on the hood--or, those spoke rims you want desperately for your 1949 Cadillac.  Modify the engine of your 1952 Ferrari to have more horsepower. The possibilities are endless.  With new cars, unless it’s a multimillion-dollar sports car, no matter what, there’s going to be another car exactly like it driving around somewhere.  Classic cars are not for everyone, but if you’re looking for something that says, “Hey this is my car and no one else’s,” an older, vintage car is just what you want.  Just the fact that there are fewer of these cars on the road, makes it a unique experience to own one.  To celebrate the uniqueness of these cars there is even an entire social scene associated with owning these relics: classic car shows and events; clubs dedicated to certain models; classic car rallies, and more. You can't get much more one- of-a-kind than by being a member of the 1967 GTO club.  

You may lose some fancy bells and whistles with an older car, but some would look at that as a relief.  There’s nothing to distract you, nothing making things happen without your say. You have complete control. In new cars, there are sensors that beep when you get too close to an object, which is a great feature, except when the sensors don’t work. When the sensors fail and you have developed a reliability on them, you will probably hit someone while backing out of a parking space.  In addition, the sensors are incredibly conservative, beeping like mad when you're still three feet away from the object.  In some new ford models, there is a new technology that actually stops the car for you if there is something in front of you; it also forces you to stay in the lanes unless your blinker is on.  Again, all of this is great for the perception of safety, unless the system fails and you find yourself smashing into things because you expected the car to stop by itself. If the car is driving itself, it takes all of the joy from the driving.  With an older car, you won’t have any of these things to rely on. You know the vehicles limitations and you are the only one responsible for controlling it. That seems a million times safer to me, no gadgets doing things for you, just you and your hands on the wheel.  New cars have displays, which allow you to operate a GPS, change the radio station, browse the Internet while driving, and even text on your in car display.  Do you really want all that distracting you from the one thing that requires 100% of your attention, driving? In fact, over the past few years the number of deaths involving texting while driving, has doubled those involving DUIs.  All this technology in new cars could be contributing to more distracted and unsafe driving. In addition, with modern cars, if anything breaks, even the tiniest thing, you practically need to be an electrical engineer to have any hope of fixing it. So, you take it to the dealer and they fix it for a ridiculous price because they know you can't fix it.  With an older car and a little bit of knowledge and determination, you can fix every single part of that car. Because engines back then were simpler, less mechanically complicated, and there was more space to work. Classic cars offer the owner the opportunity to fix every piece of it himself. Not only is it great to fix things yourself, but also knowing that if it breaks you can fix it, is incredibly rewarding.  With no distractions and useless nonsense, a classic car is safer and far easier to maintain.    

Sadly, in our modern world, you are what you drive.  People judge you on the model of your car, how clean it is, and how much you take care of it.  So, why not use that to your advantage?  With an older classic car, you can paint a picture of anything you want, except, boring.  You can be the cool guy with 1967 Camaro and leather jacket or the classy aristocrat in a suit driving a 1956 Rolls Royce.  When owning a classic, you are connected with it in on a personal level.  Whether your long lost uncle gave it to you, you rebuilt it with your own hands, or you just take care of it with a passion, it is all yours and you’re proud of it.  When people think of you, it will be you and your car they see.  Long time Tonight Show host, Jay Leno, an avid classic car collector, owning over 100 vintage models himself, explains it well.

“A few years back I received a letter from a woman in her 90s; she'd gotten married in a 1951 Hornet. In fact, it was the only car she and her husband had ever owned. After he died in 1996, the Hornet was parked in her garage. I went to look at it. Physically, it was fine. Mechanically, it was worn out. It had gone more than 260,000 miles. But it was all there. Every receipt was in the glove compartment. So I bought the Hornet. But really, I was buying the story more than I bought the actual car.” --Popular Mechanics, October 1, 2009

Up until recently, cars were designed with the intention of giving their owners a certain look and style.  “If one had to define the essence of a classic car,” Leno continued, “form over function would certainly have to be at the core of this definition.” Back then, the cars were first designed for a “look.”  The design was then given to the engineers and it was their job to make it drive.  The finished product was a car specifically designed for its looks: think the 1968 Stingray, or a 1963 Shelby Cobra, or the 1964 Astin Martin DB5.   For some people, it’s also a form of therapy having something to take care of,” Leno states.  “You don’t see classic cars in therapist’s parking lots.”  I wonder if today’s children will grow up with fond memories of their family car. I don’t think they will.  Forty years ago, cars were icons.  You bought them to make memories and to drive for as long as possible.  Today’s cars are built to be used, broken down, and then recycled back into the system.  The result is a car that has no originality because there are so many exactly like it driving around.  People drive and own modern cars with the mindset of “Oh when this car breaks down, I’ll just buy a new one.” they have no connection with their car besides that it gets them from point A to point B.  I would even question how this affects people’s driving, when they have little or no care for the automobile they are sitting in. I know I would be a safer driver if I was driving a car I had poured my heart into and was one of kind. Owning a classic can not only bring you personal joy and connection, but it could indeed change your entire perspective on driving.    

I’m not saying a classic is for everyone, that’s impossible.  But, if you’re the kind of person who wants something original, uncomplicated, and that you can identify with on a personal level, then a classic car is exactly what you’re looking for.

 

         

Dracula Vs. Frankenstein

Bram Stoker’s Dracula and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein are two of the most well known and widely recognized fictional stories ever written. They were also some of the first science fiction and horror novels.   After reading the two books, I was struck by the grotesqueness of both monsters in the stories.  Count Dracula was a far more terrifying antagonist, however, because of his choice to be evil, his actions against humanity, and his manipulative characteristics.

The legend states that Count Dracula was known as Vlad III, “The Impaler.”  He was a brutal man from the region of Transylvania, in Hungary, who had a reputation for impaling his enemies on wooden stakes.  When his father Dracul summoned him to war against the Ottoman Turks, Vlad could not refuse. Leaving his beloved wife behind, he rode to war. While Vlad was away, false letters of his death reached his wife. In her bitter sadness of losing her beloved, she threw herself from the castle walls and into the river.  Vlad returned victorious from the battle only to find his wife had taken her own life.  In his mad rage, he swore everlasting vengeance on humanity for its cruelty.  He made the choice to consume human blood and, in doing so, became something other than a man, a vampire with an everlasting life filled with death and murder, forever spent in the shadow.  Dracula chose and sealed his fate without a second thought. The monster created by Victor Frankenstein, however, was different.  Essentially, the monster was a victim; a victim of the carelessness shown by his creator.  Victors only aim was to create life, he cared nothing for “the life” he created.  Almost as soon as he had created life, Victor rejected it, by shunning the monster and abandoning it to a world that would never accept him. Society too, judged the monster by his gruesome appearance and not by his actions, for the monster was by no means evil by nature.  In the beginning the monster was kind and did what he could to help people.  He even saved a girl from drowning in a river, but still people were too blind to see him for who he was. When the monster discovered that a family of peasants was poor and in need he gathered food and firewood for them. Sadly his kindness was only repaid with words of disgust and looks of fear from the family. At one point, the monster befriended an old blind man, until the man’s family returned and chased the monster away.  The monster never meant to be a killer, he tried his very best to befriend and help those he met.  Dracula would only be kind to you if he needed you to do something for him, or he was about to drain you of all blood.  

Dracula was a killer, every death he caused brought him one step closer to his sinister goal of world domination.  Dracula wanted a vampire dominant world and he was willing to drain the blood of a countless victims to get it.  Everyday, Dracula needed the blood of a newborn baby, just to keep him looking healthy.  Dracula enjoyed it, he enjoyed sucking the blood from his victims, every look of pain or fear he made appear on someones face, he relished.  It was a lust to him, something he longed for and enjoyed.  When Dracula turned the young lady Lucy into a vampire, he did it with such tenderness and care, but afterwards he threw Lucy aside without a second thought.  Frankenstein's monster, killed out of desperation.  The monster was lost and alone in a world that didn't want him.  The monster did murder Victor's younger brother, but it was so Victor would feel the same pain and loneliness that the monster felt and to force Victor to evaluate the monsters existence. Later, the monster killed a young girl whom Victor had grown close to.  All of this was because Victor abandoned the monster in a world that wasnt ready to and probably never would accept him. On top of that, he demanded Victor create him a mate,  so that the he would no longer be alone.  In hopes of ending the killings,  Victor began doing just that, but midway through, he began to have fears of an entire race of monsters being born.  So, Victor took the half-made monster and dumped it into the ocean.  When the monster saw this, he retaliated out of pain and anger and murdered Victor's wife, not out of anger, just so that Victor would know how it felt to lose someone he cared for.

Count Dracula loved to treat everything as if it were simply a game.  He relished toying with his victims minds. Watching them slowly fall under his spell, gave him a rush of exhilaration and seeing them lose their minds made him smile.  for example, when John Harker visits Count Dracula at his estate in Transylvania, his entire castle was set up to drive Harker mad.  Harker is picked up from the town by a carriage with a driver that never utters a word.  That’s an odd way to greet someone. The driver takes him up into the mountains by a snow covered and overgrown road.  Once reaching their destination, in the middle of nowhere, Harker notices the castle. It casts an ominous presence instilling fear, with ivy covered walls and stone gargoyles looming in the shadows. Dracula tells Harker he is welcome to go anywhere in the castle, yet more than half the doors he finds are locked. Harker immediately questions what is behind those doors, adding an element of anxiety to his already fearful mind.  Harker discovered a dark dusty room full of coffins, he investigates further and finds that none other than his host, the count, is sleeping in one. Not being able to take anymore, Harker tells the count that he needs to leave.  Dracula bids him farewell, but when the door is opened for Harker, the entire courtyard is full of massive snarling wolves.  Harker runs back inside and for the remainder of his stay the howl of the beasts never ceased.  The castle that welcomed him, had now become a prison.  Later in the story, in London, Harker has organized a group to hunt down and ultimately kill Dracula.  But Dracula shows his cunning manipulation once again by turning the fiance of one of the group members into a vampire, in hopes of demoralizing his adversaries and scaring them off his trail.  The behavior shown by Frankenstein’s monster was all a reaction to the hostility he faced when encountering others and especially his maker.  If anything, Victor was the one instigating and manipulating the monster.

Both monsters are extremely scary, Im not trying to make Frankensteins monster seem meek, but as you can see Dracula was a far more terrifying antagonist, with his cunning brutality and the horrible crimes he committed.  He manipulated and killed to get his way without a second thought. Frankensteins monster was pushed into the things he did and was never evil by nature.  For these reasons, Dracula was the most memorable and captivating.