acrorat said:
the guy did not start off well in his review:
"There are those who will tell you that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. That it’s subjective. They are wrong. Ignore their post-modern psychobabble.
Beauty is objective. Great minds from Plato to Kant had it right. Need proof? The Nissan Juke. It is not, in any sense of the word, beautiful. In fact, one can definitively say it is the opposite."
Well I think it's a beautiful car, thus proving his first point wrong. It's like saying, "there are those who think flavour is subjective, they are wrong, it's completely objective and Marmite tastes revolting."
Plus subverting a widely accepted philosophy as he does would be textbook post modern psychobabble, no?
So I started off on the defensive and every typo and lack of edirorial input (I think you meant on-ramp dear boy) stuck out more than it probably should in an actually reasonable review... once you get past his complete lack of understanding regarding the unavoidably subjective nature of reviews.
People are gonna love Marmite, and people are going to think the Juke is beautiful. You can't tell them they're wrong.
Unless it's Marmite.
That stuff is disgusting.