Talk Morgan Forums Morgan Sports Cars Morgan Three Wheeler & Super 3 P-40 Warhawk with 'shark' decal

Talking of schemes, I particularly liked the one of the VW in "the car that ate Paris".

A similar one on the M3W would be novel but a vacuum would have to be an OEM!

If I actually associated the decals with war, say in the manner of a bloody stump, they wouldn't be very endearing. My reaction was closer to Wallace and Grommit, so you can see there is a huge disconnect there. Had I actually served in either of the big ones I might not find it so humorous. I feel very fortunate that I did not.

But since M3w doesn't come with pair of machine guns, or any real military utility, I feel OK with the admittedly whimsical styling, in somewhat similar vein to the fun of watching Spitfires circle Duckworth, without thinking too much about their actual purpose.

Funny enough, I was in Tuscany, admiring one of the hill towns, when I realized that the entire beauty of the scene was the result of once pervasive violence that forced people to build fortified cities at the top of hills. An ugly fact, yet a beautiful result.

You so spoilt my retort with your PM you know me too well

The Cars that ate Paris

Peter the only good thing about the whole film was that paint job...

A thoughtful post MOG3w - well done.

An interesting discussion.

I have a painting by Alex Hamilton of a Spitfire and in no way do I view it as a representation of "killing your fellow man."

Without dragging up a conversation about the rights and wrongs of wars, including justification, from a personal perspective, I view the Spitfire as a beautiful object. Whether painted in camouflage and equipped with guns or painted in one colour civilian paint and without weapons, I would still find it a stunning piece of design. Like a Morgan, I could simply look at it for hours and enjoy so many aesthetic aspects of it. Can it be used to kill, yes it can; however, the same could be said for many items and in this instance, and many others, I am able and willing to separate the way someone might choose to use an inanimate object and the innate beauty of it.

Another example would be the Samurai sword. I own one and while the sole purpose of a sword would seem to be defence and/or attack, mine has never been 'used in anger' and I love it for the craftsmanship (the work on the handle, the folding of the steel, etc).

I believe the conversation is perhaps separation of form and function and whether one chooses to do so or not.

In the case of the Morgan Three Wheeler, I wouldn't choose to have bullet hole decals and military roundels because they don't 'speak' to me, nor do I appreciate the aesthetics of them (the RAF roundel is excluded from this but I still wouldn't fit it to a car). The Shark mouth, however, I have always loved the design of and would fit it to the M3W. Richard, I take your point and can understand it (I also respect it) but in my case, I'd view the fitting of the Shark mouth as utilising a design element rather than a emulating, or praising, a war machine.

The Spitfire I view as a technological tour de force and a symbol of deliverance, Mitchell (the designer) gave his life to see it through( he was fighting bowel cancer) and died before the war, non of this applies to the 3W, an amusing distraction for men of a certain age and income ( people like me! ) so war paint and decals strike an discordant note for me, but if other folk like them all well and good, I posted to see what the prevailing views were, and to put my perspective forward, not to judge others or criticise how people spent their cash

Hmmm......and there was I a couple of weeks ago sitting in the show car and idly thinking of how a pair of dummy Vickers machine guns would look mounted on the scuttle! I'd better not go down that route!!

Of course once mounted, no one will be inclined argue with you (unless you confess that they are fake).