Jalopnik 
Enter your username and password.
Detroit, 5:21 PM
Sat Nov 21
29 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jalopnik.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Ray Wert | Email | AIM
Road Test Editor:
Wes Siler | Email
Weekend Editor:
Murilee Martin | Email
Associate Editor - Houston:
Matt Hardigree
Associate Editor - Detroit:
Ben Wojdyla
Editor-at-Large:
Mike Spinelli
Contributors:
Mark Arnold
John Krewson | Email
Andy Didorosi
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
08/30/09
As for you, Mr. Wert, "I see what you did there!" To borrow from one of Rachel's spheres of interest, musical theatre, I believe you just "Yente'd" us with Jalopnik's much-deficient female demographic. You sly devil.
08/30/09
Which basically means, she expressed weakness (non-knowledge) and expressed enthusiasm. Which means, tear into the weakest part of that assertion, which is weakness and then... THIS!
I've known people who don't understand why the oil needs to be changed... AND THEY WERE GUYS! So she’s cool.
08/30/09
To @Dhillaz 2.0: Does huffing petrol count?
To @smalleyxb122: I KNOW. That always bugged me, that the dream-sequence Greased Lightning wasn't unveiled to appropriately vanquish Balmudo, though I guess you have to appreciate the verisimilitude of it all.
To @Mad_Science: Nice xkcd comic. I will take you up on your offer. And then I will school Ray but good, perhaps by writing about how Scott Monty is the Greatest Tweeter of Our Time.
To @Novaload Is Just Plain Novaload Again and @HoonThatFerrari: I'm starting to feel the love. We'll get there.
To @Hello_Newman: Great advice. Taken under advisement.
To @PDQ2: I loved this comment so much.
To the chick who promised to take me driving whose comment I now can't find: DONE. And since it'll just be us girls, we can totally do it topless. Yay!
To the people who suggested I should go back to the kitchen: Haaa, the joke's on you. I cook worse than I drive.
Aight that's it. Thanks for getting my blood boiling this weekend...and thanks for the pageviews. See ya on the dirty oval, suckas!
08/30/09
08/31/09
08/30/09
08/30/09
08/29/09
Rachel, I have a huge girl crush on you now for your ability to put up with this bullshit. Sometime you and me can go out driving together. We can learn how to do burnouts and donuts on Novaload's lawn.
Boys, you all need to get over yourselves.
(Insert arguing on the internet poster here.)
08/30/09
08/29/09
But while we're on the subject: What is a "car person"?
Is it someone who is an expert on vintage Bugatti, Duesenberg, Pierce Arrow, Packard, Cadillac, Delahaye, etc?
Is it someone who's an expert on hot rods, Dueces, T-buckets and Lead Sleds?
Is it someone who's an expert on Offy racers, Indy racers, CART racers, F1 and Indy racers?
Is it someone who lives for 50's and 60's American iron including '59 Cadillacs, suicide door Lincolns, Corvairs, Corvettes, GTO's, Rivieras, Imperials, T-Birds, - or even the more mundane El Camino ?
Is it someone who appreciates the latest from Ferrari, Bugatti, Lamborghini, Bentley, Rolls, etc. ?
How about those who like 'rice rockets' as some people derisively refer to them?
I'm a docent at a well known car museum and I can tell you that these are ALL "car people". I see them every time I lead a tour. We each have our own interests and favorites. Deal with it!
08/29/09
Still, the article does show us how important and an iconic part cars play in popular media, even to people who couldn't care less about turbos and diffs.
Oh, and if it makes you feel better, I've never put a wrench under the hood.
08/29/09
Sure, everyone has the right to speak out about WHATEVER they want to - whether they know anything about it or not. The First Amendment is, after all, still in effect in this country. Along your continuing line of thought, though, do you really think it's unfortunate that Ray posted that here? I don't think so... yeah, Rachel got beat up a bit, but she also got plenty of positive comments herein. This thread has over 9,750 pageviews & 135 comments as of the time I'm writing this - it's one of the more active threads of the past few days... how many Jalops who didn't know who Rachel Sklar was before, all of a sudden know her now? All-in-all, she got a pretty good win out of this... so, no, it's not unfortunate. From a personal perspective, I feel a little bit bad that she felt it necessary to dedicate 315 words to respond to my 827 - frankly, I thought my post was so over-the-top-silly that it couldn't possibly have been taken personally.
Anyway, she's a big girl, and a professional writer - she does this shit for a living, so she should be able to take some criticism. And while she certainly has the right to show up here & defend her work, I'm a little surprised that she chose to do so, since - when you think about it - what does she care what a bunch of car-blog commenters think? It's not as if anything we say has even a single iota of impact on her life or career.
08/29/09
Imagine Rachel Sklar: SaveTheEnzos T-Shirt-wearing, spanner clenching, petrol drinking, recreational race-driving, hayabusa'd El Camino owner with a pet dragon.
All they need is a swig of engineerd's famous Brefass Scotch and they'll be singing like a pair of overentheusiastic canaries.
Watch this space...
08/29/09
08/30/09
08/29/09
@everyone else: As a car enthusiast, did you expect to learn about any of these cars from an article that opens with the admission of a lack of automotive knowledge?
All in all, it was a fun romp through notable cars in movies, written by and for the non-enthusiast. There have been more comprehensive lists on Jalopnik and other enthusiast blogs that cater more to our thirst for automotive insight, so the internet really doesn't need another (although I would still welcome as many as anyone wants to write).
We are, as it states in the header, "obsessed" with cars, and we view those that aren't [obsessed] as "different", and we find "different" to be confusing, and sometimes even a little scary.
08/29/09
Step 2: @Rachel, don't worry, Ray can be kind of a dick sometimes. Actually, all of us can collectively be kind of a dick sometimes.
I think the article's cute, and that you're missing out by not participating in car culture.
Our love for all cars leads many of us to a frustration with the public at large, who either see cars as transportation appliances or false status symbols.
If anyone here has what looks like an impressive car, it's to impress themselves, not others.
We're scholars of both car technology and culture. If you're willing to ask and learn in earnest, almost anyone here would be happy to teach.
It's when we see cars, car culture or car guys dismissed with disdain for any of the typical reasons that we get all riled up.
08/29/09
And I like the pic. What can I say, I have thing for people who smile and make eye contact with the camera. Bona fide.
08/30/09
08/30/09
I normally hate to say that without contributing something more. But with the mountains of other crap here in the comments, I felt this warranted an overt nod of agreement.
08/30/09
Plus, she defends herself and responds to individual commenters! How can you NOT love that?
08/29/09
Clearly she failed to take her own advice, Back to the knitting & kittens for you ;)
08/29/09
1) Jalopnites are notoriously hard on non-car journalists who fail to get their details right or capture the spirit of what the automobile enthusiast wants to know about their topic. I seem to recall a couple cable news clips a few weeks back where people didn't understand the difference between car A and car B, didn't understand the impact of specific changes from a standard V6 to an Ecoboost, etc. So, in that regard, Rachel Sklar is in some pretty good company.
2) We are automobile aficionados. We want to read articles about cars that appeal to the senses that make them enjoyable for us - namely: speed, sexy design, gripping the road, being pushed back into your seat, feeling the tires slip as you push the limits of traction, cupholders... okay, maybe not that last one. Having said all this, there was nothing 'wrong' or particularly 'bad' about Rachel Sklar's article. It just failed to go beyond the superficial pop culture references that surround cars - much like her self-admitted knowledge of cars. There's nothing wrong with that, it's just not something that appeals to the typical Jalopnik reader.
3) I read the article. It wasn't awful. It wasn't prize-winning, either. But, then, I don't think Ms. Sklar is trying to be the next Tim Russert. I will tell you this, though. Upon finishing the article, I did go out and google Rachel Sklar, followed by a little GIS action. She can come over to my place and write about cars any time she wants. :D
08/29/09
08/29/09
I'd say, in general, that the 'pigeon hole' you've alluded to was not all that small of a 'hole'. The point was more that we like for automobiles to be the main point of the conversation and we like for those automobiles to be 'appreciated'. Kind of like how I imagine true 'Artists' don't like it when we make comments about Picasso's odd use of boobs. We're focused on 'boobs', not the art or the artist.
08/29/09
Calm down. Yes, Ms. Sklar's article was a little on the extreme side of things (seeing as she hasn't driven a car before, let alone owned one), it was still well within the limits of what the internet can do.
Yes, there were a number of things in that post that absolutely got my blood boiling, such as the entire argument of the article being based based on pop culture references, and that she is getting paid to write this sort of stuff (this has probably got more to do with jealousy), I stopped reading after the first page.
Nope, I didn't feel so much as inclined to read a page further. I think most browsers have a cross on the top right hand corner, or an arrow pointing towards the left on the top left hand corner of your browser window.
@RachelSklar: You know, in order to really "appreciate cars and car culture" you sort of need to be able to drive them. Your argument became moot as soon as you said "I do not drive". That's like me saying "Pepsi Max tastes bad", having never tried it myself. Also, if you are "not a car person" why, may I ask, did you pick an article on how pop culture influenced your knowledge (or lack thereof) of cars?
Anyone else see the paradox in Rachel's argument here? If you have absolutely no interest in cars, why write about them?
08/29/09
So - if you want to school me, leave a comment on my post about what I missed (feel free to suggest things less OBVIOUS, @Novaload Is Just Plain Novaload Again, since I guess you saw that "Sound of Music" reference coming from a mile away). I'll give this a do-over and see if round two meets with your approval. You comment - constructively, without sexism - and I will step up and meet the challenge. But: If you're unwilling to give a car newbie a few tips, then you have no right to complain that she has no clue what she's doing.
It's up to you - put the pedal to the metal and we'll see where we end up.
08/29/09
I don't have much else to say apart from the fact that a lot of the guys (and gals) here are down to earth folk without pretensions and snootiness. Yes, we all like to think we know everything about cars from time to time but it's just not possible. It's a vast world out there and everyone knows that little bit extra than everyone else.
p.s: Welcome to Jalopnik. It sure has been a baptism by fire for you here.
08/29/09
And if you Google "jalopy"--which takes 5 seconds, you see Wiki and you get this:
Jalopy (also clunker or hooptie) is an old, decrepit, unreliable and often nonfunctional car which has limited mechanical abilities and is often in an unmaintained and often in a rusty or dented shape. A jalopy is not a well kept antique car, but a car which is mostly rundown or beaten up. As a slang term in American English, "Jalopy" was noted in 1924[citation needed] but is now slightly passé.
But the larger point is, there's nothing specially "you" about the car choices and no special information about these cars.
I think the basic issue is writing from the stated point of view of "I don't know anything about this object and I'm not going to bother to look it up" is going to draw a pretty negative reaction. Unless you are really, really, really witty and funny.
08/29/09
08/29/09
If I did, you'd make sure my cage failed tech...
08/29/09
08/29/09
08/30/09
08/30/09
08/30/09
If you mean listening to it, that's all well and good- but you can't say that Eddie Van Halen is a bad guitarist and vv a great one without actually picking up a guitar and playing it (even at a beginner's level).
Same with the Shovelhead engine example. I never once said that you had to be a car expert when writing about cars-everyone has their own opinion. But for heaven's sake, if you don't have a driver's license, you are pushing things towards the boundary between what is considered an article about cars with credibility and one without.
Please understand this. I by no means meant to offend you (in fact, I highly respect your guts given the hostile territory around here, and I really appreciate your civility), I was just trying to work out for the benefit of myself and others what exactly you were trying to get across in that article, which seemed based upon your knowledge of the specific cars in those movies rather than how those movies significantly changed your view of cars in general.
That's all I really needed clarification on. I never intended for this conversation to become what it is. Thanks for keeping the discussion relatively flame free though (very rare to find on the internet nowadays-the star comment system really works!). Cheers.
08/29/09
To @HoonThatFerrari: My God. If you are going to call someone out as a hack you've got to not be one yourself. This post was entirely fun, with nary a 9 am deadline in sight, and the premise could not have been clearer: What I learned about cars from experiencing pop culture. If you want to write a post about that big-block Chevelle, fine - that's YOUR experience. I could have written about Phil Taylor's incessant nattering about his 1990 Audi Quattro, always out in the driveway getting washed and buffed to gleaming red, but Lawrence Berger's big ol' purple Olds was way more meaningful, and my rationale is as legitimate as if I really, really liked how fast it went.
You come close to getting it your final paragraph, where you point to the links I call out. If you think you can know nothing and Google will explain the significance of "I'm In Love With My Car" "Ramrod" and "Henry Ford" then you must be a maestro with that search box - for me, that was the product of years of listening to Bruce with my older brother ("Born To Run" is for my motorcycle post, along with "Cool Rider" from Grease Two), with a little Queen thrown in for good measure. (And did I get car culture from my older brother? Oh, yes. With one hell of a vengeance.) As for "Henry Ford," it would delight me to no end to think that Jalopnik readers got that reference, and appreciated the use of that song rather than the more generic (and to me, far more boring) "Wheels of a Dream." "Henry Ford" is a short, amazingly efficient little song capturing one of the most far-reaching innovations in this country's history. I wasn't the biggest fan of "Ragtime" (book or musical, to be honest), but that number has stayed with me forever. Bril.
For those who seem offended that I never learned to drive: Like I said, there's a story there, but the upshot is that driving a car is a huge responsibility. A fuckup can kill you and who knows how many others. That's pretty daunting, and I have enough respect for what cars can do to be suitably cowed by that. I wear seatbelts in the back of taxis and have withheld keys from drunk people who were not happy about it. If you think I don't respect cars, think again.
But otherwise you're right. My face does look DERP in that pic. Thanks a lot, Ray.
08/29/09
This is one of the more humorous auto "buff" sites, but it can sometimes play out as mean-spirited snarkiness, like the "VW floats" parody ad posted in the wake of Kennedy's death. That snarkiness tends to be projected onto people who aren't perceived as fitting into Jalop's culture. Al Gore or Ralph Nader would not have a very good time here.
So don't take it personally.
08/29/09
And the items you picked were so OBVIOUS. (Did I write that largely enough?)
You picked things than any person on the street of almost any age could identify as the most visible instances of 'cars" in culture.
So there's really not one thing to learn in what you wrote; except some of your smugness. Maybe you should also respect the people who are brave enough to pilot these incredibly dangerous machines around.
Your post is the same as saying, "I don't know anything about football. But gosh, I learned from the Coke commercial about the jersey thing for that kid and oh, Joe Namath, he was dreamy, and there was that football movie, wait, there was one that took place in prison and there was one about some high school kids, and the cheerleaders are just amazing. But, y'know, football itself is really icky."
Besides, your thesis is wrong; in fact it's backwards. The cars didn't come from the "culture" to you -- the cars created that culture. Created all those things that entertained you so much. Because if people didn't love and "get" cars, none of those movies and books and music would have happened.
08/29/09
Also, this site probably carries the highest body count of people who have been banned from Jezebel and its usually considered a badge of honor.
Finally, your article would probably have been favorably viewed by everyone here if you had some references to the Bumblebee Camaro from Transformers and some gratuitously large pictures of Megan Fox. It would have swayed about 75% of those who didn't care for the article. Then again you shouldn't really care what we think, we're just not worth the keyboard strokes.
I think that about covers it.
08/29/09
08/29/09
I thought the automotive details were well done, both in the context of the original post, where the audience could benefit from your knowledge, and in the context of a Jalopnik cross post, where I appreciate the effort you made researching a subject that's not of your particular interest.
As someone who exposes their thoughts and feelings to the general public on a regular basis, I'm sure you don't need to hear this from me. But don't take the overly harsh criticism to heart. You didn't write that piece for Jalopnik, it just ended up here. Read in context, through the eyes of the intended audience, it's an open and honest piece. It's unfortunate that it's been attacked here as though Jalops were being teased or mocked. It's clear to me that you recognize and respect both viewpoints on the culture of cars, it's also clear that portions of the Jalopnik commentariat do not. I'm not trying to apologize for the, honestly quite predictable, reaction your article received, just letting you know that we don't all feel that way. Not everyone here is completely sexist and close-minded... It's just that those folks haven't shown up yet. In fact some of our most respected commenters are women who will readily admit their lack of knowledge but express a great willingness to learn.
Everyone has the right to their own opinion on everything and everyone has the right to enjoy things in their own way. Driving cars is not a prerequisite for enjoying them just as swinging a bat is not a prerequisite for cheering on a baseball team or having a book published required before you're allowed to enjoy a good novel. We should be thankful that you're willing to share your enjoyment of car culture with us. And I am thankful.
As a final note I'll say I respect that you came to defend yourself... But, you may have noticed, we've been having some trouble around here lately. So I'll give you the same advise I followed myself by not commenting last night: Please don't feed the trolls.
08/29/09
Hi Rachel...
If I may respond: First of all, my post was 100% tongue-in-cheek, as I thought would be obvious from the start, what with the fake headline/byline/dateline section, the absurdity of the invented pretense of you spending so much time at parties that you have no time to write, and so forth.
Yet since it was about you (or really, more directly, it was not so much about you - but rather, that one particular article of yours), I can understand why you may have felt a pinprick or two, and not realized that.
It was not intended to a be an actual serious critique of you as a writer, but a diatribe against that particular article specifically; and more generally, articles of that type or style/approach.
As for your assertion that if I'm going to critique hackitude, I'd better not display any hackiosity myself... hey, I'm not a professional writer, nor am I a writer of ANY kind - I should be EXPECTED to be a hack at best, since I'm just a regular guy expressing a few wiseass opinions on a car blog for a little part-time amusement, ferpetessakes!
For you to say that is like saying that I have to be a guitar virtuoso in order to be able to recognize that the wannabe axe-slinger up on stage in a bar band, trying to wank his way through "Eruption" is no Eddie Van Halen. So, according to you, I can't be one of the tablefull of guys out in crowd that yells: "You suck!!!" as he pukes out one car-horn-like tritone after another?
Nonetheless, my comments seem to have struck a nerve by virtue of having a seed of truth in them, as evidenced by some of the responses, including yours; and I stand by the general "drift" of what I said. What did you tell your readers that they didn't already know? Maybe you could indeed have included a few lines about Phil Taylor's Quattro or similar tales? After all, the premise of the article was the fact that everything you know about cars came from everything BUT cars - can't that include things you learned from people that own cars and are passionate about them, and not just movies or TV shows that happened to have prominently featured motor vehicles therein? At least that way you could have shared some unique, albiet vicarious, experiences - which would have provided more scope to the piece than yet another phoned-in "Back to the Future" DeLorean refrence.
So, Rachel, if you were truly hurt or offended by my comments, then I truly & humbly apologize - that was not my intent... it was just my way of expressing that I thought it was generally a throwaway article, with little real substance in it. All filler, no killer; and I'll stand by that assessment.
08/29/09
P.S. I'm a woman and don't know a huge amount about cars, but I like to see what these folks can teach me. They haven't exactly kicked me out... yet.
08/29/09
Yes, that includes women, to a point.
08/29/09
So, you're a Libertariajalop? A Jalopertarian?
08/30/09
08/30/09
Bumblebee's not a damned Camaro, and KITT isn't a Mustang.
08/30/09
08/30/09