Little Beauty

Loyal Reader Dave S sends me this missive from his gun-filled bunker deep in in the wilds of The Old Dominion:

“In your quest for beautiful sports cars I’ve always wondered why you’ve never mentioned what is for me the epitome of the class, that unlike its British brethren runs, isn’t a mechanic’s hobby, and hasn’t lost itself in the American quest for Moar Power:  the Honda S2000.”

And it’s a damn good question, for which I have no answer except increasing senility.

The little S2000 was, I think, one of Honda’s best-ever cars, with a loyal and devoted fan base;  and to this day I cannot fathom why they stopped making them in 2009 — especially as Mazda still makes their Miata to this day,  to the delight of many.

I don’t accept that S2000 sales were anemic, by the way, if that’s given as the reason.  I think that S2000 was killed by the Dreaded Bean Counters (may they all sprout assholes in their elbows and shit in their food each time they reach for the salt).  These bloodless pencil-pushers looked at the numbers and decided that unless a car sells more than million units a year, it should be done away with.  “Why,”  they would exclaim, “should the mighty Honda corporation cater to a few fools who want to drive with the wind in their hair, when all said fools need to do is lower the windows of their Civics and Accords to get the same result?”  (Maybe it sounded better in the original Japanese.)

I’m not sure that’s what actually happened, but I’ll bet it’s closer to the truth than saying that Jeffrey Epstein committed hara-kiri.

Herewith a few more S2000 pics, to make up for my earlier omissions:

2008 Honda S2000

Fie on them.  If Honda still made this little beauty, I’d have it on the shortlist for New Wife’s next car, well ahead of the Miata or the Fiat 124 derivative.

And of course, this wouldn’t be the first time Honda discontinued a fine car for no apparent reason (NSX coff coff coff ).


Reader Dave sent me a pic of his own S2000, but the pic included his hot wife with her hair and clothing all windblown and tousled (no doubt because of a long trip taken in the Honda) so I used pics off the Innerwebs instead.  I’m old-fashioned that way.

Character

I always enjoy reading Theodore Dalrymple’s articles, and this one at Taki’s Mag is no exception because as he takes on the topic of modern architects and their pulchriphobia (fear of beauty), he drops little diamonds like this into the discussion:

Taste is very revelatory of character, and though we live in an age in which we delight to talk of ourselves, in fact we do so while carefully protecting ourselves from true self-revelation or true self-examination.

Longtime Readers will know that while this may be true of a lot of people, there’s a distinct lack of that nonsense in this little corner of the Internet — most especially when it comes to discussions of architecture, or guns, or cars, or women, or practically anything which can be beautiful or made beautifully.

Pulchriphilia is more the order of the day, here.  How could it be otherwise when I marvel at things like this:

or this:

or this:

or (wrenching myself unwillingly away from further contemplation of Suzanne Pleshette) this:

…or, to return to the article’s original topic, buildings such as this:

Going along with Dalrymple’s quote above, I am quite aware that my classification of all the above as “beautiful” may reveal aspects of my character, and to be honest, I don’t care a fig.  I am what I am, it is what it is, and each of the above is a perfect example of the eponymous poem by John Keats:

A THING OF BEAUTY is a joy forever:
Its loveliness increases; it will never
Pass into nothingness; but still will keep
A bower quiet for us, and a sleep
Full of sweet dreams, and health, and quiet breathing.
Therefore, on every morrow, are we wreathing
A flowery band to bind us to the earth,
Spite of despondence, of the inhuman dearth
Of noble natures, of the gloomy days,
Of all the unhealthy and o’er-darkened ways
Made for our searching: yes, in spite of all,
Some shape of beauty moves away the pall
From our dark spirits. Such the sun, the moon,
Trees old and young, sprouting a shady boon
For simple sheep; and such are daffodils
With the green world they live in; and clear rills
That for themselves a cooling covert make
’Gainst the hot season; the mid-forest brake,
Rich with a sprinkling of fair musk-rose blooms:
And such too is the grandeur of the dooms
We have imagined for the mighty dead;
All lovely tales that we have heard or read:
An endless fountain of immortal drink,
Pouring unto us from the heaven’s brink.

Having pulchriphobia means denying the spirit that endless fountain, and we are much the poorer for its loss.  Here’s Keats’s musk-rose:

Pause a while and smell it, while listening to this.

First They Came For The Airline Stewardesses

Back in the day when airline flying meant a chance to ogle some beautiful young women in uniform, they were called “stewardesses” or “stews”.  Often, the airlines enforced a “no married women” and even an age limit policy for the stews because, the reasoning went, if the stews had families, they’d be affected by the absense of Mommy while she’d be out of town so often.  So We The Passengers had to put up with stuff like this:

 

Then some asswipe in Big Airline HR decided that this was eeeevil  and anti-womyns  or something, with the result that nowadays, international flights resemble Grab-A-Granny Night at TGI Friday, or Open Bar Night at The Villages.  (No pics, I can’t bear the thought.)

Then last year, Sports Illustrated  took some shit because, and I quote:

“…the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue  doesn’t care about plus-sized women, athletes, or religious models. It cares about staying relevant while also profiting off men buying a magazine to drool over hot women. These silly claims of empowerment through the swimsuit issue cannot change the fact that pages of sexualized women marketed toward men are inherently sexist, insulting, and gross.”

(I even talked about it here.)

Needless to say, the stupids at Sports Illustrated  decided to make their crap magazine yet more crappy, by taking the above criticism to heart for this year’s T&A issue, hence this appalling prospect:

Wait till you see the “plus-sized” (i.e. grossly overweight) entrant… it’ll put you off chocolate cake for life.  (By the way, the granny in the above pic is quite hot, IMO, but if yer gonna put some granny-aged totty in a bikini, why not someone like Sharon Stone, or Stephanie Seymour?)

This modern attitude towards women’s bodies is starting to get to me.  As are the Woke Generation, in toto.

Stalingrad Falls

…and in other not-news, we have this development:

Less than one-third of women worldwide are satisfied with the size of their breasts.

Anyone (male or female) over the age of 16 will know all this — like we need a study to tell us the news.  [eyecross]

But yes I know, this report is useless wifout pichurs.

Don’t look too unhappy to me, but I’ve never been able to figure out what women are thinking anyway.  All I know is that this girl looks quite satisfied with her superstructure:

But once again, I’m not the expert on this topic.  It might just be the guns.

Tiny

I’ve probably said this before, but I love the fact that sports cars of an earlier era were so much smaller than today’s fat-assed, safety-obsessed behemoths.  To wit, the 1995 Fiat Barchetta:

…the 1962 Alfa Romeo Giulietta:

And even by Fiat standards, the little 1950s-era 600 was a weeny:

And here are a few more, all on the same theme:

I blame it all on Mercedes, starting in that same decade:

Still, sometimes you do  need a larger car, for the family:

Or for other reasons:

I miss the old days… [sigh]