Furniture Makers, designer makers, custom bike shows and peacock display

There is a group of isolated individuals, virtually all men who work on motorcycles. Taking ordinary bikes, stripping and rebuilding them using special components. These creations expand beyond all notions of practicality. Some can barely be ridden. Function is used as an excuse. The fact they can be ridden is secondary to show. These custom bike enthusiasts meet up and show off their creations to each other. Working class boys on estates do similar work to cars. Boy racers pimp up their rides with extreme hubcaps, hydrofoils, spoilers and very loud stereos. These sculptural beasts are their pride and joy and are shown off to each other. Within these subcultures aesthetic standards are set. Participants can easily tell which are best and which step over the mark in to crass stupidity. The line is a thin one. To the outsider these worlds are peculiar, indulgent. Boy racers cars in their extreme colours are deemed tasteless. Yet to the participants they range from the ugly to the beautiful. The world of furniture designer makers operates in the same way. The work is shown and few customers come. Visitors are mainly other makers and the odd fan. An audience not unlike those at custom bike shows. These shows are not essentially about non participants. They are events where competitive display takes place. The connection to the design world, the commercial design world is very small. Design critics find the work peculiar, indulgent, sculptural, ugly. What is taking place here? This competitive search for aesthetic pattern within a tight framework. Once the rules are established, makers must use their own aesthetic sensibility to triumph. Craft skills can be borrowed. It is more about being cool. Understanding the game. Getting it just right. Peacocks, stags display to attract females. It is more likely the rut to establish alpha male that is taking place. These events are of little interest to women other than participants. It is not about attracting a mate. As consciousness studies progresses it appears we have a slow thinking process where we analyse and a quick intuitive process. The quick, reactive thought is what enables us to strike a cricket ball, to drive a car, it is by far when we are at our best. Quick thought trumps all studious academic thought speed. Survival depends on auto pilot taking over. Mathematicians talk of beauty in equations. Aesthetic taste may be the swiftest process we have. Could it be that the most desirable genes are those of the man in command of best aesthetics. The man who sees the clearest beauty may be the best survivor. But applying evolutionary theory to everything is a habit I have.