It’s ironic that little more than a week after it was announced Apple was abandoning work on their long-rumored car, CEO of Rivian RJ Scaringe used Steve Jobs’ “one more thing” line at the R2 launch event to surprise reveal the existence of another new Rivian, the R3. During the event at Laguna Beach on Thursday evening, Scaringe said the seminal phrase three times in the presence of assorted journalists and influencers – safe to assume he knew exactly what he was doing. None of this Silicon Valley synchronicity set social media ablaze though. Nope, instead the social media hype machine has been cranked up to 11 over the existence of the R3X, a ruggedized R3 with a lifestyle off-road vibe.
[Editor’s Note: This initial version of this story did not meet our editorial standards. Specifically, it did not align with our mission here at The Autopian, which is:
The Autopian exists to serve the car enthusiast community by creating content that informs and entertains, while celebrating the unifying quality of automobiles.
The initial version of this piece was too critical of people whose opinions do not agree with the author’s. Here at The Autopian, we do not ever want to imply that we are somehow smarter than our readership (because that’s simply untrue; many of us here are dipishits) and we do not ridicule people for having differing opinions. While the intention of the article’s tone was to humorously portray an arrogant car designer, there are lines that are not meant to be crossed, whether in character or out. As such, we’ve made significant revisions to this piece, and will make sure that such an oversight does not happen again. Full explanation here. -DT].
[Original Editor’s Note: This take is, as you can likely sense by now, extremely hot (and a bit exaggerated for fun, so don’t take it too seriously!). And while I know Adrian genuinely believes everything he’s saying here – and, I think, backs up his points well – I also know the man loves to lose himself in a good rant, and he’s very likely to say some things that could offend some people. He is, as he never tires of reminding us, a designer, and as such knows more than we do. But that doesn’t mean you can’t think what you think, because, as they say, we’re not here to yuck anyone’s yum. There’s drama here, and lots you do not need to take seriously. I think it’s fun.
So, if you think the R3X felt like a Lancia Delta or a Rabbit or an Omni or a Niva or a Panda 4×4 (like I did), you’re not alone, and if Adrian doesn’t agree, well, too bad, Adrian. You – with whatever car opinions you have – are always welcome here no matter what, and you don’t even have to listen to Adrian if you don’t want to. – JT]
Cue everyone on the internet suddenly becoming a car design expert, and my eyes are rotating slowly into the back of my head. Le sigh. Do we really have to keep doing this?
If you’re here for a hot take with no critical thought behind it, turn away now.
Over the last few days, I have seen some truly impressive commentary turds bobbing by in the sewer of online discourse. I’m climbing back on my high horse and let me tell you up here the air is pretty sweet. “Oh God Adrian, you’re not going to be ranting about the pernicious influence of the eighties on modern culture again are you? We’ve heard all that before.” You’re goddamn right I am, but this time it’s going to be a slightly different rant, I promise.
Before we get started: I’m not going to pile on Rivian’s design. From what I’ve seen of the existing cars online, I like them a lot. I’ve looked at the media images and watched so many videos my YouTube algorithm is poisoned to the extent that every non-skippable advert I see until I die is going to be for an EV. Examination in the metal has thus far not been possible, because the R1S and R1T are not available in the UK, although I have seen an R1S on the road (probably bought over by JLR for evaluation purposes) and the smaller R2 and R3 apparently will be available in Europe in the future if the company survives that long.
The overall look of Rivian lineup strikes me as warmer, more approachable, and humanistic in the vein of an Apple product, rather than the decontented anonymity of a Tesla. Although I would prefer to see some hard controls to balance out the reliance on a touchscreen, the haptic wheels on the steering wheel are an interesting step in the right direction. Both Rivian and Tesla are striving for economic reasons to speed up manufacturing and reduce part count, but this has real-world consequences in terms of ease of repairability and total cost of ownership. Nonetheless, I do think Rivian has done a pretty good job of developing strong, consistent branding and has implemented it well across the consumer touchpoints. It’s surprising how small details like the use of yellow as a highlight color and having lots of warm hazy photographs on their website makes such a difference in perception.
It’s Just A Hatchback
What’s really queered my pickle is the number of people I’ve seen losing their shit over the R3 for the groundbreaking design decision to make it … a hatchback? You mean that revolutionary category of car that’s been around since the 1961 Renault 4 [Editor’s Note: I think we can go back even further, to the 1938 Citroën Traction Avant 11CV Commerciale:
Sorry to derail, I just wanted to get this in there! Back to Adrian’s rant. – JT]
… and was popularized as mainland Europe’s favorite small car category in 1971 by the Fiat 127? Okay, I know it took a lot longer for hatches to catch on in the US (and somewhat in the UK) because they were seen as economy cars for the tight of wallet, but come on people – hatchbacks have been around for a long while now.
More than this though, is the galactically silly commentary I’ve seen comparing the R3X to a Volkswagen Golf. One YouTube channel was going on about the amount of Giugiaro influence in the R3X. Their focus was the superficial likeness in the C pillar, and yes both cars have one but that’s about where the similarities end. The bodyside-to-glass ratio is different. The proportions are different. The stance is different. The surfacing is different. Every single thing about the two cars, apart from the fact they’re both hatchbacks, is different. Comparing the two is an insult to Rivian chief designer Jeff Hammound, in my view.
The actual interesting thing about the R3X’s C-pillar is the feature line that turns forward around the corner of the side glazing and runs down the bodyside to provide the shoulder line and the shut line for the clamshell hood. I couldn’t put my finger on exactly where I’d seen this feature before, but then it dawned on me: the Honda e does something very similar. But I think the idea originated with the 1965 Renault 16 (above) although the execution there is not as prominent and the Renault has a normal hood.
The Uselessness Of Facile Comparisons
Another comment our friend with the YouTube channel made was Rivian are leaning into a “product design” look.
Please choose from the two contemporary design styles for your wifi hardware: “rounded soft box with white light” and “satanic death cult blood sacrifice altar” pic.twitter.com/LYvNRkheOo
— Sebastiaan de With (@sdw) January 31, 2024
When analyzing the design of something, this statement isn’t really meaningful. Everything you can buy is a product. This article I’m hate-typing right now is a product, and like it or not you are my customers. Now, I understand what they are getting at. Saying something has a “product design” look has become shorthand for something “minimal,” with consistent use of constant radii, geometric primitive forms, a lack of frivolous decoration, muted colorways, and uses of san-serif fonts when labels are needed. In other words, “a tosser with a black turtleneck who probably drives a Polestar had a lot of influence on how this particular item of consumer hardware turned out.” But it’s such a reductive and not very useful way of talking about design.
On the desk in front of me are two laptops – a milled aluminum block of Cupertino’s finest, and a black Dell G7 that wouldn’t look out of place on the flight deck of a Klingon Bird of Prey. As products, their function of being a laptop is superficially similar but the divergence in their aesthetics reflects differing design priorities, capabilities, and brand identities.
I’ve also seen the R3X compared to both a Lada Niva (even my boss David did this) and a Lancia Delta, two cars with wildly different design briefs. The Niva was a car specifically designed for a hard rural life. They were miserable grinding Soviet shit boxes at the time of launch and manage the impressive feat of making an L316 Defender feel like a fucking Bentley. I guarantee you if any automotive influencer actually drove a Niva they would be horrified by the thing. [Editor’s Note: Um, I was horrified, I guess, but I also really liked it? Maybe Adrian doesn’t think I’m an influencer? – JT]
When people about the Delta what they really mean is the Radwood-stinky Lancia Delta Integrale – the homologation special that was mopping up world rally championships in the early nineties. Not the crisp Italian modernism of the Giugiaro original. None of these cars are in any way remotely on the same planet as the R3X in terms of ideas, function, execution, or design. The R3X is a modern, handsome well proportioned large-ish hatchback that has a subtle off-road stance, is powered by electricity and suffused with a large shot of California tinged Instagram energy. It isn’t a rally weapon, a spartan shopper for German hausfraus, or a hardy mountain goat.
A Good Product Will Create Its Own Buzz
Why does it have to be like this? Why can people only make facile comparisons to existing cars? Part of it is giving the veneer of saying something of substance, without any of that hard-thinking stuff. But mainly it’s because cultural discourse now only exists within a post-modern framework. People are unable to comment outside of anything that isn’t instantly recognizable because they and their audiences simply don’t have any reference points outside of what the algorithm fed them in the last five minutes. We’re stuck in a godforsaken nostalgia loop, a post-modern ouroboros where nothing can exist on its own merits. Everything has to specifically reference something from the past, and this does the intelligent discussion of design a great disservice.
A counterargument to this would be that creating a buzz is important to generate consumer interest and generate sales – it’s a free media buy for hard-pressed (ha!) corporations desperate to get their products in front of potential customers. The human eyeball floating in the punchbowl in this instance is the fact the Rivian R2 is not going to be available until 2026, and the R3 will not arrive until after that. There was very little interaction with either of the R3 models, and attendees were not allowed to touch any of the cars at all, suggesting these were extremely fragile models with some limited driving functionality (as captured on video by people outside the event), rather than pre-production vehicles. If Rivian are trying to cultivate a Tesla-like following, that’s a fraught undertaking; trying to maintain interest online for two years might as well be two centuries in the real world.
The looming danger all this poses is that anything newly created that doesn’t exist in this retro-futurist zeitgeist will be instantly dismissed as having no desirability, whatever its merits as a product. I came across the video below by someone who refers to themself as the “Internet’s Creative Director.” He starts his argument from the premise that the Rivian R3 is a retro-inspired design, which as I hope I’ve illustrated, it very much is not. The argument continues as he dismisses the Suzuki Jimny for not being designed for the social media age, overlooking the fact that years after its release Suzuki still cannot build the damn things fast enough. But the statement that frustrated me was the assertion that “the current generation of Range Rover, does not objectively to anyone look better than this 2010’s more geometric version … if they were continuing to play into the more nostalgic playbook they would have a better aesthetic for their vehicle that I feel would be more resonant.”
The car-buying public, in the same way they always have, desires what’s new and original. An advance on what they had previously. They don’t want a new car that looks like an old one, because how would other people know it’s a new car? Despite all their insurance and reliability problems, Land Rover is selling every new L460 Range Rover and L663 Defender they can build, at a very tidy profit. And there will never, ever be anything retro or nostalgic coming out of Gaydon as long as Gerry McGovern is in charge. And all the available evidence tells me the same is true for Jeff Hammoud at Rivian.
- People Are Seeing Rivian R3s In Real Life And They’re Freaking Out
- How I’d Make A Camper Out Of The Rivian Van Now That It’s No Longer An Amazon Exclusive
- Rivian Bricks Infotainment Systems Thanks To Fat Finger Mistake
- You Can Now Buy A Rivian Van Just Like The One Amazon Uses. Here’s How Much It Costs
I think everyone trying to compare it to 80’s hatchbacks are because we haven’t seen one in a long time and our reference point is the 80’s versions.
I see a design that picked up many of the fundamentals that we have floating around our brains about those hatchbacks, without actually re-using any of the design or drowning it in shitty retro sauce.
It’s a fresh take, and I like it.
The car itself is great, and I like it. It’s the asinine commentary from non-experts that’s winding me up.
Why? Cars are for the masses and it’s been revealed to the masses. Of course they are going to comment on it.
We’ve had this disagreement before, but I’ll repeat that I disagree with your opinion that only “experts” deserve the right to comment on design. You treat it as if Good Design™ is only something an expert can understand, when I think that can’t be further from the truth.
Vehicles aesthetics certainly aren’t as objective as something like the best shape for a rocket engine nozzle. One can be proven with data and indisputably measured, the other results in contentious articles about why everyone is wrong when it comes to the E-Type.
The masses can think and feel what they like, that’s absolutely fine. People creating content from a position of authority should be held to a higher standard.
Yeah, thank you for this. As an eastern european grown boy, the comparison to Niva felt particularly silly. We know JT likes it but that’s only because he’s a bit of a masochist hehe
Right?? That looks NOTHING like a Niva. It’s not even the same vehicle category.
Now a Yugo 45 or Citroen Axel, on the other hand.
Enjoyed this one.
Okay – but I still want the least powerful one that’s RWD, lowered, on smaller wheels, and with deeper bumpers.
Please.
I imagine a single motor version will come out eventually, but I doubt lowered and small wheels will come as options. We might get 1-2″ smaller wheels as a more aero friendly option at least which I am all for.
You know how you can watch a movie and then go on rotten tomatoes and see the critics bombed it, but the audience liked it? This is that. I am not a car design expert. The car definitely resembles the other car in my dumb consumer brain, and that’s all there will ever be to it for me. I refuse to analyze it any further.
That’s absolutely fine – there’s nothing wrong with that. There are superficial similarities – but that’s all they are. People trying to be analytical should be doing better.
“The brief I gave the design team was like, we need this to be our Solo Rally Car,” Hammoud told Road & Track. “So on our image boards, we had the Delta Integrale and the Audi Quattro coupe from that era.” But Hammoud didn’t want their design to be slavishly retro. He wanted it to, as he said, have “more of that nostalgic feeling where it looks modern, but where it looks like it’s from the future, and the past, at the same time.” https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a60160869/rivian-r3-eighties-design/
I realise this is meant to be a gotcha, but mood boards are not necessarily meant to be a direct influence. It’s right there in the quote – “didn’t want their design to be slavishly retro”. My real problem is people just parroting uncritically this without understanding why the Rivian is different, and its own thing.
it would be hypocritical of me not to admit I used mood images of older vehicles of a similar type when presenting my work for review by senior designers, because it allowed them to very quickly grasp one part of my thinking. Half the time the kids in the studio didn’t even recognise them.
or maybe you’re just super angry?
I’m all sunshine and lollipops, me.
Your right, it doesn’t look like a niva, golf, or delta, it looks way better! (well maybe not compared to the “good” delta)
Came for the rant. Left satisfied.
I’m excited about the R3 so I mentioned it to my wife who knows dick-all about cars, but her first response when I said it’d be a few years before release was, “pfft, if Rivian is still around then.”
Can’t be a good sign if someone that knows nothing has that painfully correct take.
i considered weaving this into the article, but there’s another side to this which is why show cars more than two years from intended release, when there’s still a lot of development work to do and things may change.
It’s easy to be jaded in this environment. More EV “start ups” have failed or shown themselves to be outright scams than have succeeded. And even the success (so far) stories have not been without trouble. But it’s also been a couple generations since we have a truly new car company, so no one’s used to these teething issues.
I used to have cautious, bordering on snide, comments about Tesla’s longevity. Despite some suspect choices, we have no reason to believe they’re going anywhere. I put Rivian’s chances of success on par with Chrysler/Dodge/Ram etc.
I’m not the customer, I’m the product – you’re selling my eyeballs to advertisers.
And when I look at that (3 door) Golf in relation to the other two, well…
Is design allowed to be evocative and emotional, even if it not by-the-book copying? Are we not allowed to feel the 80’s Euro hot hatch vibe, right in the feels, even though the fine details are distinctly different?
Because to me, this evokes the same emotional responses as the 80’s Euro hot hatch. No, it doesn’t have the same greenhouse proportion as a Golf Country, or a similar rear hatch angle to a Lada Niva. But it very much causes me the same artistic emotional response, and regardless of the creators intent, we all know that art is interpreted by the viewer to fit the viewer. And I interpret this as modern vibe of a popular 80’s design.
Where are the red stripes, the body kit and the lowered suspension?
They’re at your nearest Autozone. Or if you’re patient but lazy, they’re only a few Amazon clicks away from adorning your new Rivian.
Orders Turbo side graphic for R3X from Amazon Prime.
Congrats! You just created a Porsche.
They were out of red ‘16 valve’ badges.
Dont forget to slap an “EFI” or “5-Speed” badge onto the hatch.
IIRC, those items complement the retro design and pay homage to the Lada Niva. Lol
I can’t tell if I should have my tail between my legs here or not. My knee-jerk reaction was “awww, cute chonky electric Delta,” but the more I looked at it the more it morphed into it’s own thing. I still think it’s cute and I’m pro-hatchback so I come from a standpoint of liking it to start, but now I feel ashamed of my initial thought.
Don’t feel ashamed, there’s nothing wrong with a design being derivative/reminiscent of earlier designs, or liking such designs. Some people just get elitist about weird things, and you’re allowed to disregard them.
It’s an instinctive response to compare a new thing you’re seeing to things you’ve seen before, and use that information as a starting point to decide what you think of it. There’s no turning this off, you can choose how much it influences your opinion, but there’s no reason to be ashamed of it. It can look like a cute chonky electric Delta and be its own distinct thing with its own character and legacy, and you can like it for what it is and for what it reminds you of.
Trust me, I’m fine with it, but having been around the vehicular block a time or two, I should know better. It’s just as a massive Lancia girl, my instinct with that shape in general is “awww, Delta!” There’s other reasons why I’m not hurt, but I shan’t go into that.
Ya know what I like about Adrian, he’s not afraid to share his opinions. Rant on good buddy, rant on.
Adrian, your rant has brought my soul some peace. When I first saw the R3 and R3X, I instantly thought “Cool, a hatchback version of the R1S.” I didn’t think anything about retro designs until I started reading articles trying to push that narrative. Even then, I kept reading the articles thinking that maybe I was missing the brief, because I didn’t find any of them convincing.
So thank you, Adrian, for articulating at least some of my thoughts, even if I wasn’t thinking them with nearly as much aggression and condescension!
Right there with you. The R2 is like a smaller R1S, and the R3 appears to largely be the equivalent of a “coupe” version (I hate crossover coupes for muddying the definition of coupes) of the R2. It uses more straight lines than what we see as the coupe SUV elsewhere, but that is in line with Rivian’s style.
Ah, indeed. I saw the R3 and R3X before I saw the R2, so my brain thinks of the R2 as the wagon version of the R3. Sadly for my brain, your description makes way more sense!
R2 as the wagon, R3 as the hatch actually makes a lot of sense. That’s probably a better way to look at it since the US isn’t gonna get a lot of actual mass-market wagons, so it’s nice to see anything close to one.
And, now, looking up what we know about the sizes, boxy wagon and lifted hatch are pretty good descriptors.
Well, I appreciate the kind words. I am a fan of boxy wagons and hatchbacks, so I like that line of thinking.
Same exact response I had. Neighbor has an R1T (Or had—I haven’t seen it in months) and it’s a decent looking truck that’s reasonably sized and goes against the grain of ridiculous aggro design faces. I like their design language on the R3 even more. I didn’t bother commenting with all the other people throwing out old references as comparison because I am trying out this new thing where I close the tab if I feel too much derision (for the comments, not necessarily the people). It was like a few years back when far too many people with serious need for thick corrective lenses were claiming almost everything with two doors looked like a Honda Accord coupe.
Good plan on not feeding your own frustration. The old saying of not saying anything at all if you can’t say anything nice is certainly true, but I also believe that there is something cathartic in trying to focus on being helpful and/or constructive, and not saying anything at all if you cannot find a way to do so.
Well, that’s why I didn’t say anything. I didn’t want to write a long comment to way too many people that wouldn’t have a nice tone. As it turned out, Adrian did one for me and then some!
Hahaha! I had the same exact thought! Adrian did the heavy lifting for me, though perhaps more than a bit more harshly than my thoughts were.
I freaked out when seeing the pictures and proclaimed it as Golf-SIZED (despite no evidence to this), so I get being caught up in the frenzy.
The only dimension that’s been released is the wheelbase, which is 2800mm (110”). So a little longer than a Golf but shorter than an Ioniq 5. However the overhangs are extremely short, so I’d say Golf sized but taller.
Yeah, the wheelbase made me think it would be a compact.
Trying to play around with scaling it to other cars (based on the WB, like Adrian mentioned), it looks like an EV Crosstrek that doesn’t look like ass.
Goddamn there are a few dead bodies in the wake of this article
I’ve been biding my time on one of my targets here.
Haha sketchmonkey deserves everything you gave him and more.
Rivian brought in a ton of engineers from JLR (not sure about design) – at least when they were ramping up a few years back. Wouldn’t surprise me if there were more than a handful driving around over there.
Jeff Hammound is ex-Chrysler. I would expect the rest of the design staff to be local hires because there’s plenty of local talent and American companies don’t sponsor visas (ask me how I know).
All I know is that I like the cheap small hatchbacks from the 70s-90s, and I don’t like this because it’s a big expensive hatchback that has nothing to do with those. I do at least like that it has a flat roof so won’t lose all useful cargo volume and rear headroom unlike so many current designs. That trend can’t die soon enough.
So it’s a Homage then? (Where’s the “Stirring pot” emoji?)
Do you want to go on The List? Because this is how you get on The List.
Depends. Do we get to snuggle afterwards or are you just using me?
Your money’s on the table. Do you want me to call you a cab?
I just lost my entire response! (Damn computer!) Ok. Let’s do this again.
To quote Dodie, “I know that you don’t want me here. I know that you don’t want me here. I’ll just call a taxi. Gotta get early in the morning again.”
6/10 – original song || dodie (youtube.com)
That being sung, The only “retro” thing about this is the roofline and angle at the rear hatch. That’s it. If I’m going that route I’m going all in and buying an Omni GLHS.
To be honest, I would never buy a Rivian because the front reminds me of Annie comic strips characters with those loopy, hollow “eyes”.
To add to your horror/judgment I like the following:
1986 WV Soracco
1988 Dodge Charger/Plymouth Turismo
1987 Cadillac Cimmaron with a luggage rack on the trunk
1994 Dodge Ram 1500 regular cab, long bed
Modern Fiat 500
1970’s Datsun pickup
Renault Fuego
Fine.
JFC.
Aren’t you due a life prolonging medical procedure this afternoon?
Excellent.
Excellent.
Cute.
Avant garde but pretty good.
About that… Imagine the scene: It’s a beautiful California summer day. You and your crew are decked out in the best 80’s fashion. Pastel colored jackets, ruler straight neckties, and topsiders. Deep base blues plays from the cassette tape followed by the boldness of brass horns. “Doobie-doobie-doobie-doobie Waaa-waa Waaa-wah-wah!” You ease into the parking lot and exit in full boss mode. Quickly scanning the scene from the shade of your Ray Bans, you nod deftly to your crew and open the trunk. Reaching in, you pull out old Ironside. Your faithful putter. You smile knowing that Sinatra and the entire rat pack would approve as you head out to the first tee of the putt-putt golf course.
Now that’s living!
As for the Charger/Turismo, is it really that much different from the quad headlight Fox body Mustang of the era?
We need more single word design reviews from Adrian, perhaps a whole article of them?
“We need more single word design reviews from Adrian, perhaps a whole article of them?”
That’s the best thing I’ve read in this whole page of comments!
It feels a bit like people shout ’80s as soon as they see something slightly angular and kinda fun.
Now is the time on Sprockets when we dance!
Touch my Monkey
Yeah? And? That’s when the slightly angular and kinda fun stuff was everywhere. Of course we shout 80s when we see it.
This is like saying “It seems like everyone thinks “stop sign” every time they see a red octagon.”
And it’s not necessarily ’80s, it could be the start of a new trend that is going to define the next decade. Something that is a reaction against the very different design trends that have defined the last decade.
I don’t know man. Looks a lot like the MK1 to me.
Adrian, I promise there are topics in which I am an expert, and you are not, and your musings on those topics would sound extremely facile to me. Just like my opinion that the R3X looks like the MK1 sounds facile to you. That’s not evidence that our minds have been dumbed down by social media and we are now living in a post-modern (whatever the fuck that means) hellscape. It’s evidence that people have differing levels of expertise and deep thoughts about different topics. It’s fine.
True. That said, the great equalizer that is the public internet gives everyone and anyone a megaphone, and with a megaphone comes the lazy temptation to make pronouncements and have opinions and share analyses about topics one does not actually know very well. In my fields, for the past 15 years or so, the word “opinionated” is now a badge of honor, when in reality it means you’re an intransigent asshole who’s a little too full of themselves.
I believe that’s the true target of Adrian’s rancorous wrath–not the average Nigel who goes “whoa that car is wicked, just like my uncle Ian’s old Mk I!” but rather the self-anointed pundits, commentators, influencers, or whatever who have very few qualifications but very many followers. The internet has democratized a lot and by and large it’s been a boon to humanity, but the rise of the commercial internet has ruined a good thing and made it difficult for non-experts to discern insight from platitude. The amateur outnumbers the professional, and we’re seeing the results of that everywhere–a Nazi businessman making ridiculous claims and demands about engineering and software (his public statements about the twitter code were eyerolling cringe), a reality show confidence man with zero experience running the country, and loud idiots everywhere.
Stopped taking my daily sixty milligrams of Vyvanse a few weeks back. Sorry.
That damn Nigel
Exactly this, thank you.
Alright, you got me. I agree. Thanks. 🙂
I don’t want to be ‘that guy’ as I definitely called the Ioniq 5 an Integrale reboot, but some of the comparisons to the R3X really are getting ridiculous. Spiritually it’s perhaps closest to a Golf Country, but I don’t see the Niva-ness at all.
However, you do have to recognize that it (and similar ‘backwards-looking’ products like the Honda e or Renault R5 EV) are going to be called ‘retro’ because they espouse design ideas outside the 2010s zeitgeist that we’re used to. I mean, the R3 looks a helluvalot more like a mk1 Golf than the mk8 Golf does. Or really any other current C-seg hatchback (Corolla, Civic, Mazda3, Leon, 308, Megane, Focus (RIP) etc.) which are much curvier and don’t have that clear delineation between flat hood and squared-off body that the R3 does. Even the squared-off Astra doesn’t have the same ’80s-esque stance as the R3. To say ‘it’s just a hatchback’ would be to ignore what most modern hatchbacks look like.
And by being similar in shape to an ’80s hatch it’s inevitable that the R3 will draw comparison with all of them considering Giugiaro designed basically all of them. Should I be the first to say it reminds me of a mk1 Ibiza? 😉
Ha Mk1 Ibiza is a good shout.
I guess my TL;DR is let people see what they want to see. Basically every styling trick in the book has been tried in the last hundred years, and of course new cars that are different from current cars might look somewhat like older cars.
However I would agree when people get nitpicky comparing the R3 to the mk1 Golf element-for-element trying to materialize a connection that’s not there, then that gets annoying.
Whether it is or not, it’s a VERY good looking car, and when it’s out, I’ll probably be getting one. It’s a REALLY great design.
Yes, it’s a good looking car. Very well resolved, and clearly a Rivian.
Is there a word/phrase yet for “stuff that we think is retro but isn’t really?” We really seem to need that right now.
Vehicle-wise, I recall back in the ’90s when adding retro design cues to largely contemporary designs was a thing; that progressed in the 2010s to making more direct copies of the older stuff; and now, we seem to be at a point of retro-saturation where the smallest hint of something is enough to make us see retro, even though it’s not really there. It’s like a retro bell curve.
I should probably do an in-depth article about post modernism, what it is and what it isn’t.
That would be really cool/helpful.
I’m a fan of watch design, and I’ve noticed of late that some companies are now going beyond the recent vogue of “reissuing” say a ’70s watch design; instead, they produce a watch design that screams “1970s watch” to us, but isn’t one they actually made back then. It’s fascinating to me the part that we as consumers play in all of it.
I want to read you go all, well, you on those Art Deco clowns.
Definitely include the best post-modern car, the PT Cruiser 😉
Baudrillard’s simulacrum is a good place to start. Personally I can’t stick with this shit, postmodernists love to use 1,000 words where 10 would do.
Thanks for the recommendation. I too have resisted a lot of that, as it’s just not my thing, but I do remain curious at times like these. Or maybe I’ve seen the Matrix movies too many times.
If you want some post post modern reading that elucidates PoMo in hilarious ways, check out David Foster Wallace’s essays, or Infinite Jest (bring a dictionary and bookmarks).
I think I read some of his work on a cruise once.
I’ve read (and enjoyed) some of his short stories, but haven’t yet summoned the courage for Infinite Jest. It’s very intimidating for me.
Jump in! The beginning is really weird and the first chapter will require re-reading, but it all makes sense eventually.
It’s possibly the funniest and saddest book I’ve ever read. Worth it.
I just like it because it doesn’t scream ‘I’m a fucking EV-SUV’ like pretty much everything else out there.
Exactly this.