I think the "detailed car image over a ghost image of the aircraft" that was
suggested, expresses the proper priority and relationship of the car to the
aircraft. The ghost image could be a top view showing the wings and
fuselage outline with the field filled in with a light color. The idea is,
it is a reference, a tip of the hat, an allusion, etc.
Terry Banbury
Mk III
> ----------
> From: Jeff McNeal[SMTP:jmcneal@ohms.com]
> Reply To: Jeff McNeal
> Sent: Friday, February 18, 2000 12:35 PM
> To: Spitfire List
> Subject: My 2 cents on planes and cars
>
>
> I've been sort of lurking on the sidelines throughout all of this debate
> for
> the most part, but I just had a thought.
>
> I live in a retirement community filled with seniors and veterans of war.
> I
> don't know much, if anything about Spitfire aircraft and with all due
> respect, I'm really not all that interested in researching them. Perhaps
> I
> should. I DO know a little something about Spitfire sports cars (and I'm
> learning more -- sometimes the hard way -- almost daily!). I could talk
> about Spitfires cars all day with anyone I meet. But I know that I would
> personally feel like a complete horses arse if someday a WWII veteran, to
> whom I owe so very much, were to walk up to my car one day and strike up a
> conversation with me about military aircraft because he saw the plane
> pictured on my club jacket or window decal or whatever and assumed I knew
> something about them.
>
> I personally would feel like a fraud sporting an emblem from WWII or one
> that pictured a WWII aircraft on it. I would feel as though I was
> dishonoring the many distinguished veterans in my community by doing so.
> I'd love to belong to the club, but not if it means I have to talk about
> planes or
> other topics I'm not qualified or interested in discussing with any degree
> of
> intelligence.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Jeff in San Diego
>
>
>
>
|