Re: badges

["John Hertzman" <johnhertzman@domain.elided>]

TJ asked "Does anyone know what year Alfa Romeo changed from the badges that
said 'Milano' at the bottom?" and Richard Arnold replied "According to "Alfa
Romeo Owner's Bible" by Pat Braden, pg 2, Milano was dropped from the badge
when the Alfasud factory went online in 1971. Nevertheless, Centerline Alfa,
http://www.centerlinealfa.com/, Alfa Logo section gives a slightly
different--by one year--description; although it was for the same reason.  I
would lean more toward the Braden description.   Maybe the digest can shed
some additional light."

Braden was wrong; one of his great merits was that he knew so much about Alfas
that he seldom doubted himself and seldom, if ever, looked anything up, and
was quick to dismiss the opinions of others, whether supported by documents or
not. Centerline, IAP, and Vick say 1972. Fusi says 1972; "With the building of
the new works at Pogmigliano d'Arco for the production of cars for a larger
market, Alfa Romeo modified its badge in 1972. The cross, snake and laurel
crown were kept unchanged, while only the writing Alfa Romeo was shown in the
blue band." (P.419). D'Amico & Tabucchi say much the same thing: From 1972
onward, with the launch of the Alfasud produced at Pomigliano d'Arco, the
Milano script was eliminated, as were the two undulating lines." (P.21). The
Alfasud plant did not go online in 1971 as Braden said it did; while a
prototype of the Alfasud was shown in Novemeber 1971 at Turin, in June of 1972
the car was launched in a big splash for several hundred journalists, other
bigwigs, and Italian dealers.

One must hesitate to say anything critical about anyone as revered as Pat
Braden, and 1971, 1972, what's a year anyway? But this glitch, however minor,
is far from unique; there are many, with many of them much more substantive.
Braden asked me, Fred DiMatteo, Don Black, and probably others to proofread
the galleys of his "Bible" before publication; I spent weeks at it, doing what
scholars consider doing another person's homework, made and documented many
suggestions, and very few of them were incorporated as revisions of his text
as-written. I understand that Fred and Don Black had esentially the same
experience.

Pat Braden was, I understand, a professional technical writer for various
manufacturers, and he certainly had long and vast experience as an owner of
Alfas and as a writer about them for AROC's "Alfa Owner" magazine, but (like
many long-time Alfa owners) he had a love/hate relationship with the marque,
which led him to exaggerated praise, exaggerated belittlement, and a cavalier
disregard for documented fact that differed from his impressions or
recollections. The technical aspects of his books have been immensely useful
to many owners, but are by no means beyond criticism;  the Reagan mantra of
"Trust, but verify" certainly applies. The historical parts fall well below
the technical; much of what he wrote is reasonably close to the mark, but a
lot isn't. Does it matter? Perhaps not. Pat said it was easy for people who
hadn't written anything to criticize those who had. That may be true, but it
does not negate the responsibility of a writer, or absolve his work from
criticism. In this case Centerline, unpretentiously, said one thing, Braden
said another, and Richard Arnold "would lean more toward the Braden
description" because it WAS the Braden description. I would lean the other
way, for the same reason. Reader's choice.

John H.
--
to be removed from alfa, see /bin/digest-subs.cgi
or email "unsubscribe alfa" to majordomo@domain.elided