Cunard Line Unveils David Linley Artwork for the New Queen Elizabeth

[Sauer-kraut]

It reminds me of what the S.S. Norway had somewhere, there was all kind of marquetry and metal inlay pictures near the elevators.

[guernseyguy]

Their only fault it that they belong to an era of homogenization and they fail to impress as 'one and only'.

 

This 'era' has been going on for as long as steam ships crossed the Atlantic, if not longer. It made sense for Sam Cunard and shipbuilders to repeat successful designs (with the odd tweak here and there) as much as it does for Mickey Arison. 'One offs' were, and are - few and far between - generally because they were failures and not worth repeating.

[Cruachan]

This 'era' has been going on for as long as steam ships crossed the Atlantic, if not longer. It made sense for Sam Cunard and shipbuilders to repeat successful designs (with the odd tweak here and there) as much as it does for Mickey Arison. 'One offs' were, and are - few and far between - generally because they were failures and not worth repeating.

 

Peter,

 

your knowledge of these matters is infinitely greater than mine, so correct me if I'm wrong, but is it not true that the first four ships ever built for Cunard, namely Britannia, Acadia, Caledonia and Columbia were all, in essence "cookie cutter" ships?

 

I also seem to remember reading somewhere that Samuel Cunard made a very deliberate decision that his ships should be, if not absolutely identical, then at least very similar - his thinking was that he wanted his customer base to be loyal to Cunard the shipping line and not to any individual ship in its fleet.

 

Plus ça change...

 

J

[guernseyguy]

is it not true that the first four ships ever built for Cunard, namely Britannia, Acadia, Caledonia and Columbia were all, in essence "cookie cutter" ships?

 

Oh yes - in general Sam ordered ships in multiples of at least four, if not six or more. The only exceptions were when ships turned out to have serious design flaws and were not repeated. In general 'one offs' were failures.

 

Of course the original queens were 'one offs' - but as they were designed nearly a decade apart it is not surprising that the lessons from the first should be learned in the second - but if they had been built in tandem, they too would have been 'cookie cutters'. Sam (and Mickey) very wisely aim to please their paying passengers - not the land-bound 'rivet counters'.

[guernseyguy]

Samuel Cunard made a very deliberate decision that his ships should be, if not absolutely identical, then at least very similar - his thinking was that he wanted his customer base to be loyal to Cunard the shipping line and not to any individual ship in its fleet.

 

Another good point. How many reviews of Queen Elizabeth this October are going to start with 'Having sailed on Queen Victoria we found our way around very easily. The ship is beautiful and (but) my preference is for the decor on.......

[RobertGraves]

This 'era' has been going on for as long as steam ships crossed the Atlantic, if not longer.

 

This era is our own, modern era. Globalization and homogenization rule today on many aspects of human life. They did not do it in the same degree during Sam's life - or much later. They are dominant in relatively recent years.

 

It has more to do with human mentality rather than just shipping

design. This is why I speek about 'impression' as 'one and only'. And a feature of naval architecture has been capturing the minds of people - 'impressing'.

 

Uniformity and homogenization have their own valuable merits - and the Vista

ships are wisely designed. Just, when you see one of them, you say: 'OK, it's only one of them more'.

 

PS. I love QV and I know I shall love QE. Just remarking and giving to Caesar what is Caesar's.