"Le Mans Sleeper" V11 in Tonti frame

[LowRyter]

@4corsa

Chuck builds airplanes in his backyard, with a hanger & fab building and grass strip.  

Your bother's plane is beauty.   You guys be careful up there.

[Scud]

6 hours ago, 4corsa said:

This brings up the heart of the conversation "blending artistry and engineering". The epitome of this pursuit was during the Renaissance, with Leonardo da Vinci likely being the most notable example. The best artists were also engineers and/or architects and vice-versa. And it was not only from their training, but their patrons expected them to have a keen interest and curiosity in both.

.......the design and engineering culture of Italy. There, engineers are still expected to be well-informed of all arts and history, and are passionate about it. Engineer/Designers such as Tamburini, Zagato, Michelotti, Taglioni, and Magni all had in-depth and integrated knowledge of every aspect of the cars or bikes they were designing and were usually involved in every step. This is true "blending of artistry and engineering", and the reason why Italy has produced, and will continue to produce, the most revered and emulated designs of our age.
 

Stuff like this is why I love this forum.

[audiomick]

5 minutes ago, Scud said:

Stuff like this is why I love this forum.

Yes, I had a very similar thought whilst reading that.

[Lucky Phil]

20 hours ago, 4corsa said:

What is your definition of art Phil?  

Once something enters the world of having at it's core reason to exist a physical functionality, purpose or use it's not part of the "art" world in my view. A motorcycle or a car by definition are transportation devices first and foremost as is an aircraft. They can be beautifully designed, formed and crafted but in my mind they are not art. A Spitfire no matter how beautiful the design is, is never referred to as a piece of "art" nor was the Concord or any other aircraft ever produced that I can think of for that matter. I wonder why people are so quick to assign the tag of "art" to a particular motorcycle as I've seen many times but not to something like a Spitfire? Both machines designed to transport people to a location albeit by different means but a beautiful motorcycle somehow enters the realms of "art" for some and the beautiful aircraft does not. A mystery to me at least.

The acid test is ask a non motorcyclist if the MV Agusta F41000 is "art" and they'll look at you like you are insane. BTW my MV along with the 1000SS Ducati lived in my lounge room and dining room for years.

 

Phil

[docc]

So many great replies. We have had so many of these "custom build" topics, but this one grew into a life of its own!

I was fortunate to visit the Guggenheim "Art of the Motorcycle " exhibit when they displayed it in Memphis at "The Pyramid ". I am not convinced our wee group that descended upon the exhibit could have been considered Art Aficionados, yet we pored over the exhibit with a passion equal to the highest level enthusiast of the Classic Painters .

I love the triad that @Lucky Phil introduced as Design/Engineering /Fabrication , and the extension of that thinking, suggested by @Speedfrog:

"If you think of the motorcycle as a blend of this trio of design/engineering/fabrication, it’s fair to say that different people value different ratios of these elements for what represents their ideal motorcycle.  "

> As far as any particular motorcycle being seen as an object d'art , I submit the time I was saddling up at a coffee shop in the city and some young fellow re-parked his family's car and leapt out to get a close-up look at mySPORT, exuberantly exclaiming, "IS THAT ITALIAN?!? MAN!! THAT IS A WORK OF ART !!!! " No idea who the fellow was or how he might have been trained or educated, but he obviously had good taste!

> Exhibit Two: Those various motorcycles that have been displayed in our "lounge rooms " or "dining rooms ."  As well as those of us who wish we could if The Minister of Stately Affairs would stand for it . . . 

As for mySport, she must settle her artly-self on the dais in the footlights of the shop.

Long may I devote myself to fabrications that consider her engineering and respect her design ~ ~ ~

 

[activpop]

2 hours ago, Lucky Phil said:

Once something enters the world of having at it's core reason to exist a physical functionality, purpose or use it's not part of the "art" world in my view. A motorcycle or a car by definition are transportation devices first and foremost as is an aircraft. They can be beautifully designed, formed and crafted but in my mind they are not art. A Spitfire no matter how beautiful the design is, is never referred to as a piece of "art" nor was the Concord or any other aircraft ever produced that I can think of for that matter. I wonder why people are so quick to assign the tag of "art" to a particular motorcycle as I've seen many times but not to something like a Spitfire? Both machines designed to transport people to a location albeit by different means but a beautiful motorcycle somehow enters the realms of "art" for some and the beautiful aircraft does not. A mystery to me at least.

The acid test is ask a non motorcyclist if the MV Agusta F41000 is "art" and they'll look at you like you are insane. BTW my MV along with the 1000SS Ducati lived in my lounge room and dining room for years.

 

Phil

I think this is one of the most beautiful airplanes ever designed, along with the Lockheed Constellation.  It can stir my soul just like an older Ducati 750 bevel or a V11. Something about the lines that just keep me looking.  Isn't that what art does? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Not everything can spin your propeller, but this Piaggio Avanti does it for me. 

[4corsa]

All this talk about more power and faster...it has a place.  But no one rides a Guzzi for that.  It's the "feel", the inertia of that locomotive flywheel pulling you, the steady feel in corners.   I ride my Ducati and it's almost too good.  Some times it's just boring.  I get on one of the Guzzis, it still gives me a smile.  I like all my bikes but I spent so much time on the Duc, I get on the Guzzi and it's a nice change.  Lately, the Duc has been sitting.  I don't have enough curvy roads for it.

I could not agree more LowRyter. As you know from the other forum, I sold my Supersport. I briefly considered selling my 03 Le Mans instead, but soon realized I would regret that far more. I look forward to riding it more than my Thruxton RS or R1200RS. The design has always just seemed right, and very Italian. Still puts the biggest smile on my face when I take it for a long ride.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[Lucky Phil]

33 minutes ago, activpop said:

I think this is one of the most beautiful airplanes ever designed, along with the Lockheed Constellation.  It can stir my soul just like an older Ducati 750 bevel or a V11. Something about the lines that just keep me looking.  Isn't that what art does? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Not everything can spin your propeller, but this Piaggio Avanti does it for me. 

Well after 42 years as an aircraft engineer almost exclusively on commercial jets ( I worked on DC4's as an apprentice as well) anything with screaming turbo props leaves me cold in the visceral sense. It might look beautiful in an image like you posted but as soon as those turboprops wind up it's lost me. It's just a tool from then on. A pretty and highly competent tool but a tool non the less. Art? No. Pretty? yes. Beautiful? maybe. 

Phil

[Joe]

Couple years ago I rode down with my father and my two sons to Birmingham Al. Although I had been to Barber a half dozen times, watching Landon’s (5 at the time) react to this museum with motorcycles displayed like art was priceless. His first reaction was pure excitement, amazement and passion. For the following hour we tried to keep him from running through the museum screaming at us to look at the many motorcycles on display. It’s the passion that true art can extract that makes the difference to me. Not many places do it better than Barber Museum. Lastly, of course I took their picture next to a MGS-01. 

[Speedfrog]

On 7/30/2023 at 8:25 PM, 4corsa said:

What is your definition of art Phil?  

7 hours ago, Lucky Phil said:

Once something enters the world of having at it's core reason to exist a physical functionality, purpose or use it's not part of the "art" world in my view. A motorcycle or a car by definition are transportation devices first and foremost as is an aircraft. They can be beautifully designed, formed and crafted but in my mind they are not art. A Spitfire no matter how beautiful the design is, is never referred to as a piece of "art" nor was the Concorde or any other aircraft ever produced that I can think of for that matter. I wonder why people are so quick to assign the tag of "art" to a particular motorcycle as I've seen many times but not to something like a Spitfire? Both machines designed to transport people to a location albeit by different means but a beautiful motorcycle somehow enters the realms of "art" for some and the beautiful aircraft does not. A mystery to me at least.

The acid test is ask a non motorcyclist if the MV Agusta F41000 is "art" and they'll look at you like you are insane. BTW my MV along with the 1000SS Ducati lived in my lounge room and dining room for years.

 

Phil

Even if maybe I don't fully agree, I think I can understand not considering any production vehicle, as beautiful as they can be, to be art, particularly for someone with a lifelong career as an engineer in the aviation industry, with its stringent safety and regulations requirements. I imagine that the engineering element would be revered, overshadowing all other aspects of the machine. I respect (even admire) that.

All the vehicles you are referencing are the products of a manufacturer created "as a transportation device" for the specific purpose of "transporting people". Although the design briefs couldn't have been farther apart in terms of people transport between the Spitfire, a single seater fighter aircraft, and the Concorde, a luxury supersonic airliner capable of carrying 100+ passengers... I must confess that I've always thought the Supermarine Spitfire (along with the Jaguar E-Type) to be the sexiest machine(s) to ever come out of British manufacturing. But, I digress...

Motorcycles in general, as a mode of transportation, are a rather individualistic affair, being only able to only carry two people at best, maybe three with a side car, but in the case of the bikes discussed here, mostly one.

I would add that in this era, in the US in particular, a majority of motorcycle owners see their bikes as an object of leisure and not so much as a mode of transport. Although, what is the saying again, "a Honda transport the body but a guzzi transport the soul". Transportation either way... But I digress again. 

So what of custom built bikes?

This inherent individuality, and the fact that they are relatively simple machine, lends itself to personalize, transform and create entirely new and unique machines. Unchained from the constraints of mass production, an individual becomes free to favor any one aspect of the trio design/engineering/fabrication over the others.

The lines can be blurry but when this endeavor gives birth to a single unique specimen at the hands of a skilled artisan, a visionary creator, what I see is Art... Rolling Art.

 

[audiomick]

I am reminded of a "rule" that I learned very early on at University: The question was posed "when does noise become music?", and we were taught that the correct answer is "when the composer says it is music".

Perhaps I should note that the course of study was music theory with a focus on 20th. century composition.

 

Anyway, the idea behind the "correct answer" can be applied to anything. When the creator maintains it is art, then it is art. One can express one's own opinion of the object as art, but not deny that it is art.

 

Therefore, if someone puts a heap of bits together to make something that resembles a motorcycle and says it is art, then it is. It may very well be bad art, and equally likely a bad motorcycle, but it is art because the person who made it says it is.

 

Christo comes to mind: very successful, very popular, but what a wank.

 

Having said all that, I personally tend to land in the court with Phil and Pete. A motorcycle must, first and foremost, work properly. Modifications should primarily be aimed at improving the function.

Generally, the form of a functional improvment is pleasing to my eye. Things like titanium fasteners and well finished machining are the final touches that make a bike beautiful and not just pretty.

[Frenchfrog]

I'm firmly in that camp too AudioMick hence my personal dislike of choppers, bobers and many custom builds.

I think the Arts and craft movement early in the 20th C had it pretty much right in terms of balance and that's what I suspect a lot of builders are now trying to emulate but with added 21 st C ego .Taking the guzzi trike as an extreme example we can see just where the ego can lead to: impractical and pointless modifications just so the builder/owner can show off exclusivity and make heads turn. An awful lot of art has exactly the same motivation as far as I'm concerned.

[Speedfrog]

@audiomick  I actually never heard or read the creator(Max Hazan) of the bike pictured above label his creation as Art. I chose it because it is an extreme example, far removed from any aspect of practicality and function and only the result of its creator's vision to tip the triad(thanks @docc) balance heavily in favor of the design, it is still a motorcycle. In fact, I don't think I ever read or heard any custom bike builder worth their salt calling their creation Art. It is only from a consensus of observers that some of these creations are deemed worthy to be labelled Art - or not.

And this rather simplistic notion that if I dip a piece of dung in liquid gold and call it art >> IT IS ART!!   Sorry, but it's ludicrous. You can make all the noise you want and call it music, but you better enjoy the sound of your own noise because I doubt you'd have an audience.

I think it's pretty clear that not everyone is moved by the same forms but we are not discussing tasteless and worthless attempts at bike building by neckbearded Joe Threefinger out of Swampland here, but rather tastefully crafted machines showcasing unique creativity and impeccable fabrication. 

You seem to be of the function over form squad, I respect that, just another mix of the balance, you like "titanium fasteners and well finished machining",  knock yourself out - whatever makes you happy...

BTW, I saw Le Pont Neuf in Paris wrapped by Christo in '85, I was there during the 2 weeks installation and it was a fantastic sight when done. I wish I could have seen his Running Fence in situ here in Sonoma and Marin County but that was before my time here. I like Christo's work. 

@Frenchfrog   I don't have any personal affinity for Choppers, Bobers, Cruisers and most so called custom builds. But being a lifelong ébéniste I respect and admire engineering skills and craftsmanship wherever they may lay.

The Guzzi trike, I posted as a joke, as a vile counterpoint to a beautiful bike. I'm sure the dude that built it is pretty happy with it but I doubt anyone in their right mind would call it Art. 

Art is universal but it's not for everyone...

[audiomick]

4 minutes ago, Speedfrog said:

worthy to be labelled Art - or not.

...call it art >> IT IS ART!!

The really important thing to keep in mind is that there is such a thing as bad art. Just because someone calls something art doesn't give it any intrinsic value, just a name. I can't say it isn't art, but I can say it is crap.

 

PS: not form over function, form is important. But I find if something is cleverly designed for good function, it often also has a pleasing form.

[Frenchfrog]

The Guy with the Trike got a very mixed commentary on face book which is to be expected ...and gave out as good as he got which is his right.Sad waste of time, skill and money AFIC.

"Merda d'artista "