Hello, Again.(Column)(retro-futurism)

Byline: Richard S. Chang

When the new Mustang made its assault on car magazine covers of America recently, it revived my private internal debate on retro-futurism. Actually, it's more of a personal complex that goes beyond simply love and hate.

Remember Sam Neil on his first ride into Jurassic Park? His mouth agape. Fumbling to take off his Top Gun sunglasses. Wobbly legged and collapsing to the ground at the feet of a feeding Brontosaurus. That's me. I am half-filled with awe at the style and look of certain retro-futurist car designs, much in the same way that I'm amazed by the detailed workmanship of movie sets and Disney World. But then another part of my brain steps in and wonders if it's right for car designs to go backward and defy progress. I keep hearing Jurassic Park's Dr. Ian Malcolm's stuttering words ringing in my ears:

"Dinosaurs had their shot. And nature selected them for extinction.''

I think that logic also applies to retromobiles.

I'm in favor of retro when you're talking about ballparks and furniture design. Halle Berry in a Bond bikini is a no-brainer. But I'm not sure it's the best aesthetic for modes of transportation; I want my trains to look like bullets and my Boeings like starships. Maybe that's just me, but I've got to believe astronauts don't want their space shuttles looking anything less than the cutting edge of technology.

The first time I went uh-oh was when I saw the PT Cruiser. Spotting the odd Morgan, GT or Prowler on the streets-that's cool. Retro for limited production numbers is fine. Like I said, I've got nothing against their looks. But when a company starts banking its future on a Neon-based crossover with the front end from a '50's salvage-yard truck, my brain goes code red. I begin hearing Malcolm's speech: