Automoderated users, Autopatrolled users, Bureaucrats, Comment administrators, Confirmed users, Moderators, Rollbackers, Administrators
214,388
edits
The Aesthetics of Technology: Difference between revisions
→Real Life
m (update links) |
|||
| (14 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{trope}}
{{outdated}}{{Cleanup|Ironically, this page is outdated, with lots of "now" and "recent" references to stuff a decade or more old. A few have been changed. Others still need it.}}
[[The Aesthetics of Technology]] is a [[Common Fan Fallacies|Common Fan Fallacy]] which holds that if something ''looks'' more advanced, it ''is'' more advanced, according to the viewer's own personal standard.▼
▲
The viewer's own standard will, in these cases, not actually map directly to the viewer's own life-experience, but will be surprisingly weighted toward [[Zeerust]]: high technology is expected to look high-technological, so a visually complex special effect implies more technology than a visually simple special effect. [[Forbidden Planet|Robbie the Robot]] has lots of flashing lights and moving parts, so he looks more advanced than [[Star Trek: The Next Generation|Commander Data]], who just looks like a plain old human with a funny skin tone.▼
▲The viewer's own standard will, in these cases, not actually map directly to the viewer's own life-experience, but will be surprisingly weighted toward [[Zeerust]]: high technology is expected to look high-technological, so a visually complex special effect implies more technology than a visually simple special effect. [[Forbidden Planet|Robbie the Robot]] has lots of [[Blinkenlights|flashing lights]] and moving parts, so he looks more advanced than [[Star Trek: The Next Generation|Commander Data]], who just looks like a plain old human with a funny skin tone.
Obviously, there is a bit of strangeness here: a 1950s computer, with all its tubes, light bulbs and keyboards, ''looks'' vastly more technological and complicated than a plain, little, all white MacBook, even though the [[Everything Is an iPod In The Future|MacBook]] may have four processor cores literally ''millions'' of times more powerful than the old 1950s computer. This fallacy generally overlooks that one hallmark of advancing technology is the "comfort factor" we design in: something new and marvelous may well look all techno-, with exposed wires and flashing lights, but as technology advances ''even farther'', this techno-miracle will be refined until it can be given a form factor that doesn't stick out like a sore thumb. After all, it takes much more technological innovation to create the minimalist wallet-sized cellphones of today than to build a [[World War II]] army field phone. This is rather like complaining that a modern analogue watch which can set itself via radio link to an atomic clock is less advanced than a 70s calculator watch, because the latter has ''more buttons'' and a ''segmented display'' (this principle is the reason futuristic computers tend to feature [[Extreme Graphical Representation]]).
It also overlooks the way design aesthetics change over time, totally independent of technology. In the 1950s, people thought that
In general, as the "future" becomes the present for us folks in the real world, the miracles and advances tend to look not-quite so flashy as people in the past imagined them. Even if they change our lives enormously, they tend to do it in such a subtle way that you might not even notice by looking. The newest Boeing 747's look nearly identical to ones built in the 1970s but they're far more advanced inside. Some modern family cars are quicker than vintage sports cars, but they don't ''look'' as fast. A 2009 Dodge Challenger features all sorts of electronic pizazz such as cruise control, traction controls, computer-controlled engine, side airbags, GPS, voice recognition and whatnot, but outside it looks like a modernized 1970 Challenger. Your modern office building using modern building techniques might not need flying buttresses to hold it up, and it may indeed look a little different from the office buildings of a hundred years ago (it might even be a modern construction built behind a 19th century façade!), but it's not an organic-looking chrome spire seven miles tall with pneumatic tubes instead of elevators. We could probably build them that way, but we don't, because that's neither practical nor what our design aesthetics call for ([[wikipedia:Burj Khalifa|outside of Dubai]], anyway).
For fans, this tends to come up with [[Long Runners]] or [[
Note that this is completely [[Inverted Trope|inverted]] by [[Sufficiently Advanced Bamboo Technology]], where extremely advanced technology appears deceptively primitive in the form of stones, crysals, idols, monuments or ancient ruins.
For reasons that ought to be obvious, this fallacy is largely absent among fans of [[Steampunk]]. See also [[Shiny-Looking Spaceships]], [[Used Future]], [[Stanley Steamer Spaceship]] and [[Everything Is an iPod In The Future]]. See also [[Cosmetically Advanced Prequel]].
{{examples}}▼
▲{{examples}}
== Fan
* In ''[[Aeon Entelechy Evangelion]]'' we have the New Earth Government Army which uses utilitarian designs for its mecha. And then we have the Loyalist Nazzadi with their sleek and smooth mecha, surpassed only by their elite with even sleeker and smoother mecha.
Line 27 ⟶ 29:
* This has actually popped up in a lot of the fandom for the ''[[Iron Man (film)|Iron Man]]'' movies, where Obidiah Stane's Iron Monger suit is less "advanced" than Tony's suit since Tony fought it and won while only at 17% of power. The suit uses conventional weapons and is bigger and "clunkier" than Tony's more streamlined suit.
** This could also apply to the "briefcase suit" that Tony uses in the 2nd movie. It is more portable, and looks a little fancier than his normal suit, but it is apparently less powerful and protective, and it isn't established that it can even fly. This is because the suit is exactly what it's used as in the movie: An emergency measure. It's something Tony can slap on real quick to deal with smaller, sudden threats mostly to his own person.
* Contrast Gru's riveted-steel "Cold War" aesthetic in ''[[Despicable Me]]'' with Vector's white plastic "iPod" look.
== Literature ==
* The ''[[Revelation Space]]'' universe created by Alastair Reynolds [[Hand Wave
* In ''[[War of the Worlds]]'' by [[H. G. Wells]], originally published in 1898, the narrator and main protagonist is one of the first at the scene of the fallen 'meteor' which turns out to contain a space-going artificial cylinder. To open, the cylinder slowly ''unscrews'', the height of imagined spaceship door technology at the time, and evidence of the aliens' technological sophistication (from a late 19th Century perspective at least).
* In the ''[[
Line 38 ⟶ 41:
* ''[[Star Trek: Enterprise]]'' was widely criticized for how much "more advanced" the NX-01 looked compared to its ''[[Star Trek: The Original Series|Original Series]]'' counterpart. Which is to say that the ''Enterprise'' had computer displays, exposed wiring, and all-around better special effects. Of course, the interior design of the NX-01 was inspired in part by ''modern'' NASA designs. The NX-01 is meant to look, to an early 21st century audience, about 150 years in advance of current technology. The NCC-1701 was meant to look, to a 1960s audience, about 300 years in advance of current technology. Because of the shift in design aesthetics, "300 years more advanced than 1966" looks less advanced than "150 years more advanced than 2001". But, of course, no one knows how design aesthetics will continue to shift in the future. "In a Mirror Darkly" shows the NX-01 crew encountering an ''Original Series''-era ship, and ''they'' clearly think it looks far more advanced. The standard explanation is that the ''Original Series'' era designs show a far greater level of "comfort" with the technology, form factors simplified and exposed wires hidden away behind walls. Put another way, the NCC-1701 was the product of a sort of "Art Deco" period of starship design.
** A related problem was that communicators on the show were made smaller than those in the [[Star Trek: The Original Series|the first show]], due to cell phones being much smaller. Again, it was a matter of finding some sort of balance between the "futuristic" and bulky technology of the 23rd Century and still making the modern series appear futuristic by modern standards.
** The fact the NX-01 looks almost exactly like the ''Akira''-class ships from the ''[[Deep Space Nine]]'' era (first seen in ''[[Star Trek: First Contact|First Contact]]'') was a big problem for some viewers. Different standards are one thing, but even in-universe it's a more advanced design (while Starfleet has been cannibalizing old designs for years, thus allowing the ''Akira'' to be [[
** ''[[Star Trek: The Next Generation]]'' took this even further, with the sets specifically designed to downplay the functionalist, technological aspects in favor of a livable-looking design aesthetic (in order to demonstrate the superiority of 24th century technology and because the Federation had been in peacetime for so many years); as such, the bridge of the ''Enterprise''-D incorporates leather chairs, carpets, gently-sloping ramps and even wooden surfaces with only minor instrumentation. This was downplayed by subsequent series (the bridge of the ''Voyager'', for example, is composed almost entirely of control panels).
*** This is explained as ''Galaxy''-class starships (like the ''Enterprise''-D) specifically being designed not only as Starfleet's flagship class, but for long-term exploration, and as such for entire families to live onboard for years at a time. As such, they're designed to have less of a [[Buffy-Speak|science-y]] feel and more of a 'home' feel. ''Intrepid''-class ships, though, are for science (but not [[For Science!]]) & exploration, and only designed to be used by a small crew for a few weeks or months at a time, and as such less attention was paid to aesthetics. (Also note that the ''Enterprise''-E, a ''Sovereign''-class starship, has a more "futuristic" appearance than the ''Enterprise''-E, and is more of a battleship than an exploration ship.)
* One of the myriad complaints against ''[[Team Knight Rider]]'' was that the cars "did not look nearly as advanced" as KITT of the original ''[[Knight Rider]]''
** Thing is, except for the instrument panel, the original KITT's interior ''was'' pure stock thirdgen F-Body.
* Parodied in ''[[Red Dwarf]]'': When Kryten believes Lister to be a Mechanoid, the fact he looks perfectly human is evidence he's a less advanced
* ''[[Stargate SG-1]]'':
** The depiction of the race called the "Nox" is a subversion. Their entire culture's technology is completely salient and has been completely integrated into the surrounding environment in a manner which makes the the technology virtually indistinguishable from the natural terrain. Mind-bogglingly advanced technology (capable of resurrection), and you wouldn't have the first clue how they did it because they look and act like a hunting and gathering society; they are small tight-knit groups which exist largely in harmony with the local ecosystem.
Line 59 ⟶ 62:
== Tabletop Games ==
* In ''[[Exalted]]'', it is mentioned that the Solars built Artifacts to be both functional and beautiful. When the Dragon-Blooded took over, they couldn't do both, so they decided to just go with the functional. Turns out, they couldn't do that quite as well either...
* This has been invoked with the old-school-looking ''[[Warhammer
** Many assume Tau technology is more advanced than the Imperium because it looks more futuristic. In [[Department of Redundancy Department|actual fact]], Imperial technology is remarkably reliable (save for a few weapons) and have things far ahead of the Tau (teleporters, for example).
*** The Tau are considered far more advanced than the ''current'' humans of the Imperium. The Imperium is still full of worlds with swords and muskets - or stone spears and bone clubs. [[Canis Latinicus|Teleportaria]] and the like are all ancient relics built in a bygone age which are maintained by folks who hope to keep ancient machines running by appeasing the Machine Spirits and often have no clue how they actually work. The Tau, on the other hand, have built their own technology, understand how it works, continually make new toys, and can keep making more of them. A suit of Terminator armor for a Space Marine is an ancient, irreplaceable relic built in a lost golden age; Crisis Suits for Tau pilots are rolling off the assembly lines and subject to continual tests and improvement. The [[Dark Heresy]] core rulebook lampshades this when a shopkeep in the sample adventure tells the PC's that while their worlds might have fancy laser guns, in his store they can buy a crossbow or get out. The Imperium is [[Doing
** Averted with weapons. For example, plasma weapons: in the Imperial they're rare but not uncommon (which is relative - thousands of plasma guns are made each year, while ''billions'' of lasguns are made), and hand held. Tau have hand held plasma weapons in the form of the Pulse Rifle. It's their standard armament while they are borderline, and don't forget their [[Hover Tank]] and [[Mini-Mecha|Battlesuits]]...
*** Very few worlds can make plasma guns; most are relics hundreds or thousands of years old, lovingly and even religiously handed down, and often are quite likely to kill the user. Many "low-tech" Imperial weapons are incredibly unreliable and spotty in the fluff and in the RPG's and board games. "Primitive" autoguns can rarely make it through more than twenty shots before jamming in [[Dark Heresy]], and even Storm Bolters jam with hilarious regularity in Space Hulk. The wargame's metagame (read: Marines everywhere!) leads to plasma guns showing up a lot more in table top than the setting would normally excuse.
Line 70 ⟶ 73:
== Video Games ==
* A lot of things in the ''[[Mass Effect]]'' series play this trope straight. [[Word of God]] states that they wanted to deliberately invoke a clean, futuristic look, especially in the most civilized areas.
** On the other hand, it is averted in the seedier places (like Omega, which still has an enormously advanced level of technological development, despite being the epitome of a [[Wretched Hive]]) and by the ''really'' advanced
* Played with in the [[Mega Man (video game)|Mega Man]] and [[Mega Man X]] series. While the hero character had a simpler-looking design than the bosses, said hero was the one who can copy bosses weapons for his own use, supporting a wide arsenal of powers. X is literally described as having unlimited potential, and throughout his series, developed abilities that were previously seen after he picked up armor parts or health upgrades; it's like the concept of Weapon Copy was taken to its logical conclusion and turned into an Ability Copy.
* A good example of this can be found in the training mission of the videogame ''[[Deus Ex]]'', where one of the rooms is a small "museum" showing the history of artificial enhancements. The old electro-mechanical enhancements make their users look like cyborgs; but if someone is equipped with the new enhancements based in [[Nanomachines]], he will look like pretty much any other human.
Line 103 ⟶ 106:
** In some respects, this is similar to the example of airliners above, at least for the actual spacecraft - a conical capsule is pretty much the most-proven shape for re-entry at translunar velocities. The Orion capsule, however, will be bigger, carry more people (4-6, as opposed to Apollo's 3), and be capable of 'loitering' unmanned in orbit, so ''all'' the astronauts get to go to the moon, which is a distinct improvement from Apollo.
*** It also mean you don't get any Challenger-like failures between parallel components, because there aren't any, (unless you're using booster rockets).
** In the same vein as the F1 cars mentioned below, ''Soyuz'' capsules were first created for the Soviet Moon program in the late '60s. Now, some forty years after, they still look almost the same from the
*** But technologically advancing at a very slow pace. The Russians didn't put in an LCD "glass cockpit" until the TMA model, in 2002. This was approximately 20 years after the first such cockpits were installed in production aircraft.
** The "step backwards" moving from the Space Shuttle to the Orion capsule is more of a purification. The Space Shuttle was, from its inception, an ungainly ship that was intended to do every possible orbital mission in one reusable package. Orion is designed to put astronauts where NASA needs astronauts, and leaves most of the complicating factors from the Space Shuttle mission (heavy lifting especially) to unmanned rockets.
Line 111 ⟶ 114:
*** The Boeing-Bigelow Aerospace CST-100, essentially a private, Low Earth Orbit-focused version of Orion, fulfilling the same ferry/resupply role.
*** The Russian "Rus" project, which looks like a cross between Soyuz and Apollo.
*** The Europeans have a vague notion of converting the Automated Transfer
*** The Japanese have the same plan as the Europeans, adapting the H-II Transfer Vehicle into a manned craft.
*** The Indians are developing an indigenous launch capability; the "Orbital Vehicle" is to be a three-astronaut vessel similar in shape to the Dragon, but only a bit larger than Gemini and significantly smaller than Apollo.
Line 117 ⟶ 120:
** This is complicated because car design is far more driven by fashion than a lot of other technology. From the mid-'80s through the late-'90s, car design was driven by aerodynamics; the resulting vehicles were seen as futuristic. There was eventually a backlash against the "aero" designs, which tended to make everything look the same; this led to a rise in "retro" designs. Combine this with strict European pedestrian safety standards, the weight and bulk of modern passenger safety systems, and the rise of SUVs and the "Freightliner" aesthetic, and suddenly, flying bricks are back in vogue. Futurism can still sell, though: see the Toyota Prius and similar vehicles.
*** Not that a massive rectangle can't look futuristic. Look at the Chevy Avalanche. It's a ''pickup'' that looks like it was built to fight [[G.I. Joe|COBRA]].
* Try looking into the cockpit of an [[The Eighties|'eighties]] Formula One car in a museum. From the outside, it doesn't look primitive; but inside, there's a plain fiberglass and steel honeycomb, analogue dials, a H-pattern
* Aviation gives us a partial subversion: the [
** The "partial" part comes from the plane being a one-of-a-kind technology testbed for, among other things, seeing how well and how cheaply current advances in technology can handle the ''problems'' introduced by the design, which standard, less advanced(-looking) wings don't suffer from. The conclusion was "not very well" (and probably also not cheaply) -- performance gains were smaller than expected, turbulence problems were larger, and so this particular path isn't going to be pursued.
** As it turns out, the [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ac/X-29_in_Banked_Flight.jpg/220px-X-29_in_Banked_Flight.jpg Grumman X-29] pre-dates the S-47 by about a decade.
Line 129 ⟶ 132:
* The F-117 "Stealth Fighter" was actually a light bomber. Looks futuristic. Each one was [[We Will Use Manual Labor in the Future|built by hand]] with electronics from other more mundane aircraft (including the C-130). One was shot down over Serbia. When it was retired there was an outcry in the defense press. Why was such an advanced craft headed to storage? It was obsolete, the program that designed the faced shape was decades old. Its hand built construction made repairs and upgrades difficult because each airplane is an [[Ace Custom]].
* The B-52 Stratofortress = Tube with wings (made in the 50s). The B-1 Lancer = Slender tube with swing wings (made in the 70s). B-2 Spirit = Flying Wing (made in the 80s). The B-1 and B-2 were supposed to replace the B-52, but the B-52 is planned to be used until 2045. (This has more to due with role. Simply put, the B-52 can haul more bombs than the other two. Sometimes stealth is needed, sometimes speed, sometimes you just need to flatten a couple of city blocks.)
*** Also, Tu-95. Same time, same class, same retro
* Speaking of [[
* The comedy actor and closet engineer Robbie Coltrane noted in a book on engines that public trust of propeller and jet planes has almost swapped since the 1950s. "People used to be scared of jet planes because they couldn't see the propeller going round. I was in a turbo-prop recently and this woman sitting beside me said 'Look at the propeller going round, it's really scary isn't it!' Obviously the once-alien jet engine has proven itself over time, and the prop has come to be viewed as old-fashioned and
** It has something to do with the current noise restrictions. Propellers can easily be ''more'' effective than jet engines, but they're oh so much
*** Yeah, but I can't imagine bird-strikes doing as much harm to turboprop as to a jet, unless the bird managed to get right in the duct.
* Sailing ships are universally considered primitive and old-fashioned. But the latest concept in cargo ship design is to use a [[wikipedia:SkySails|giant sail]] for auxiliary power, to have oil tankers go windsurfing. (10-35% less fuel used, at that!)
** [https://web.archive.org/web/20090207093612/http://yachtpals.com/fastest-sailboats-2079 The fastest sailboats in the world are anything but primitive.] Under the right conditions some of those boats can ''outrun'' modern warships.
** Novelist and engineer [[Gene Wolfe]] once suggested that nuclear submarines could be replaced by a fleet of fibreglass sailing ships: one missile per ship, so they couldn't all be taken out at the same time, and they [[Physics Goof|wouldn't show up on radar as they wouldn't be made of metal.]]
* The A-10 Thunderbolt II can reasonably be called the best close-air-support aircraft in the modern world. It is highly maneuverable, [[More Dakka|always has enough firepower]] for the job and is extremely durable. It is considered one of the pinnacles of modern combat aircraft design. [[wikipedia:Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II|It looks like the bizarre lovechild of a P-51 and a 747.]]
Line 144 ⟶ 147:
* On the topic of aviation, though, it ''has'' been a trend for military aircraft to look sleeker and more advanced as technology progresses, which is perhaps part of the reason why people expect more advanced technology to look 'advanced'. Start with the flimsy biplanes of [[WW 1]], and continue through the propeller-powered fighters and bombers of [[WW 2]], the early Korean War-era jets, the first supersonic jets, the Vietnam era fighters, the '4th-generation' fighters, and the relatively recent arrival of stealth designs. It does indeed look at least partially as if there has been a general trend towards sleeker, more advanced looking designs over time.
** This is in no small part due to the peculiarities of aerodynamics. It might be a cliche, but "If it looks good, it flies good" is a very real phenomenon for fighter aircraft. The single wing on a WWII monoplane provides more lift than the two wings on a WWI biplane due to a pair of wings interfering with each others' lift. The swept wing was developed in Germany precisely due to the better performance it allows at high speed. Current fighters (from the F-16 all the way to the F-22) tend to use a variant of the delta wing, which itself is designed for higher speeds yet than the standard swept wings. So looking faster and sleeker in this case really is faster and sleeker. There is some certain design practicality here, too. The A-10, despite being powered by turbofans, has straight wings that allows it to maneuver far better than contemporary delta- or swept-wing fighters. The huge transports follow the general civilian aviation rule of swept wings for jets, straight wings for props. Interestingly, aside from the A-10, what's one of the best close-support aircraft in US inventory? The AC-130, a transport plane modified with two 20mm Vulcan cannons, a 40mm Bofors gun, and a 105mm artillery gun. No special computers to guide missiles or bombs onto targets, just the equipment to aim a bunch of big guns at whoever's marked as a bad guy (or something that's marked as harboring bad guys) and shoot.
* Another real-life example is ENIAC, the first well-known (room-sized) computer. When photographers and TV crews arrived to film the super-exciting, brand-new machine in 1946, they complained that there wasn't anything happening. So the designers rigged up
* [[Terry Pratchett]] has said that in his days doing news stories at nuclear power plants the news crews would rig up smoke machines and green lights because there really isn't much to see except a lot of plumbing. Considering that this is a nuclear powerplant, one would think it'd be best to hope that you wouldn't see anything exotic happening at all. Then again, this was pre-Chernobyl. This is pretty common in all kinds of science-y settings- at least one chem lab keeps [[Technicolor Science|food coloring]] on hand for journalists/promotional photos.
* If you're wondering what's the aesthetic in vogue at the time of this edit, look no further that the iPod range, and the current crop of video game consoles. It's all about plain black and white, rounded edges, unobtrusive buttons, touch screens and folding, sliding or flipping. Of course, as we speak there's people [[Follow the Leader|following it]] and [[Subverted Trope|deliberately avoiding it]]
** So far the general direction of technological aesthetics has been towards increasingly invisible designs that can be used with as little direct interaction as possible. One guess for a logical conclusion of this trend would be a world where you can't see technology almost anywhere, since it's all been integrated into mundane objects, clothing and even inside people's bodies, and programmed to answer to subconscious cues or simple thought.
** As of May 11, 2022, iPods aren't available at all.
* This expectation led to a ''[[(The Customer is) Not Always Right]]'' [http://notalwaysright.com/all-in-wonder/2547 entry].
** That entry is doubly humorous considering that [[wikipedia:Macintosh|Macs]] ''started out'' as all-in-one machines and have actually ''returned'' to that basic design concept.
Line 153 ⟶ 157:
** "This is amazing, young man!"
* Consumer electronics were subjected to a variation of this trope around 2005: miniaturization. As electronic engineers started devising new ways of cramming more transistors in less space, product designers started going ''way'' overboard over how little they could build their devices, and as a result, the mid-2000s saw stuff like watches with a PDA and a cell phone, and cameras almost the size of a medium USB drive. These days are long since gone now that consumer electronics have mostly settled down to a more practical size.
** In this same vein, we also have portable computers. The Macintosh Portable, one of the first portable computers in history, was almost 18 inches in size. Modern laptops might be able to go all the way to 10 inches (in fact, a modern netbook will be as small as ten inches, weigh less than 1 kilogram, have integrated WLAN, bluetooth and camera and ''still'' run for up to 7 hours while you are using it), but desktop replacements of 17-19" of size have recently been getting quite
** It not unknown though for ergonomic to fall to aesthetics when economics is in its flavour. Most modern VCRs use fiddly 'futuristic' menus over traditional push button interface to do the same job. why? [[Money, Dear Boy|Buttons cost more money]].
*** How can VCRs be modern?
Line 165 ⟶ 169:
** There is also a critical reliability issue with spaceflight computing - hardware has to be as reliable as possible, even if that means using very old equipment. If a brand-new processor that's currently on its way to Pluto turns out to be flawed, the replacement options are limited. Similarly, software used in space needs to be reliable, robust, and as simple as possible. Ask an astronaut if he wants to see a desktop-computer-style driver conflict error on his navigation computer.
* [[IBM Personal Computer|Personal Computer]] enthusiasts, especially hardcore gamers, sometimes have fun with this trope with regards to Case Mods. Just look at [[wikipedia:File:Saibotmoddedcase.jpg|some of the things]] [[wikipedia:File:Saibotcaseside.jpg|they can do]] with their rigs.
* Warships are an aversion. Surface warships no longer have the massive guns and do have lots of electronic equipment. The effect can make them appear anemic by comparison to older designs (even though they have lots of missiles as a substitute) but there is no question they look more advanced. Submarines in the past looked really no different than surface ships (you ''could'' tell the difference of course; with the conning tower to start with, but you would also see the similarities). Modern subs with their whale-like pressure hulls look more advanced. They also look scarier and arguably have improved appearance as something about streamlining is a natural attraction to the human eye. Be that as it may, modern warships not only are unquestionably more advanced, they look so whether or not the appearance comes off well.
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Common Fan Fallacies]]
[[Category:{{PAGENAME}}]]
| |||