There is nothing simple or plain about a Porsche or any sports car for that matter. It was the product of tens of thousands of hours of engineering, millions of dollars in development, it has a a Bentley phonebook-sized manual for its upkeep, it requires a level of competence to drive safely the way it was engineered to be driven, it requires amounts of money the average person does not have to maintain it, it is a rolling financial liability for most ordinary household budgets.

My unsolicited opinion is that this is not at all what the author had in mind. A simple pleasure is something that will always be ingrained in your memory, cost you next to nothing to experience, and puts everything back in perspective. Examples: star-gazing, running on the beach, washing your dog, drinking ice tea on a hot day. Put it this way, the simpler the pleasure more it speaks to your clarity of mind at that moment. Personally I think this is why so many have overly-complicated lives.

Jake, I agree with you all the way on this concept. You bought a car that is potentially depreciation proof, gets good gas mileage, & you endeavor to maintain it yourself. I describe the early 986 interiors as having everything you need & nothing you don't. They are quite simply the funnest device ever invented by man.

Apparently your teacher suffers with a common stereotype preconception about Porsche & their drivers, which you are duly bound to dispel. :dance:

^ His teacher is not far from the mark. He may not know a Dart from a Porsche like Seinfeld's 73 RS, but he's right those were analog cars.
Athough not as tech driven as the most recent Porsches, these 986/987 are still part of the new school which are very disconnected, insulated cars with limited feedback and computer-assisted but-saving.

Dodge Dart is a generic "poor man's" car leading me to believe the teacher is fixated on price of entry. Jake's Box is a 2.5 which seem's primative to most 987 drivers & is pre-PSM.

I often experience a 'supreme simple pleasure' when driving my Porsche. 'Pure joy' would be another way of describing it. All seems right in the world, specifically, that I own this particular car-- it is ME! It may be a complex piece of machinery and expensive to build/ fix and operate but the experience of cruising briskly through a long series of curves while interacting with the instantly responsive, brakes and steering is a simple pleasure to me. The tight body control, devoid of nautical movements such as yaw, bounce and roll provides a simpler path down the road. The blissful sound of the flat 6, happily howling at my beck and call. This car answers my every whim, instantly. The overall response between me and it, is instantaneous- telepathic even. 'No cush' allows a deeper connection. We are one! Simplicity, like sitting in the woods and hearing no ONE!
I once read in 'Excellence' an article by ----?Harris as he tested the GT3 RS 4.0. He quoted someone else saying that what a( specific) car had asked of him 'was reduced to a few simple, delicious movements' and that it was a sublime experience.
Also, I think JFP's signature may be alluding to the same thing- ' it's a kind of magic'.

The 986 is 'pure' enough to allow a simple, more direct connection between man and machine. The rate of progression and overall response time of the machine to the driver's inputs feeds the senses and causes the two to feel as one. Increased delay and decreased overall response widen the disconnect between man and machine- more towards the couch end of the spectrum...cush ( luxury) is the opposite of your 986 ...

Here is something I copied from an old thread that defends the Boxster as a practical choice of transportation. Maybe you can use some of it in your paper.

I hate it when people call Boxsters impractical. When I bought my Boxster I had this discussion with my dad, who took one look and said:
"What did you buy that for??"
"What do you mean?"
"Well it's totally impractical."
"Why?"
"It's only seats two people for starters."
"My last two cargo vans only seated two, no-one called those impractical. What else?"
"Must have cost you a small fortune."
"Less than the wife's Corolla and no-one called that impractical. What else?"
"The Corolla has space to carry cargo - that thing just has a tiny trunk."
"Actually, it has two trunks with more than enough space for luggage for two on an extended road trip. Practical enough for me. Next?"
"The mileage must suck."
"Nope - it's better than my B4000 and again, no-one has ever called that impractical. Next?"
"It must cost a lot to maintain as specialized car like that."
"Nope. I can do all the maintenance myself as it is very simple to work on, and parts don't seem to be any more pricey than domestic. Remember when you paid nearly a thousand bucks to fix the gas gauge on your Chev (which no-one ever called impractical) because it came as a unit with the fuel pump located in the gas tank. Or the $1500 you forked out when you digital dashboard went blank. And you want to talk about high maintenance costs? Next." (I'm getting irritated at this point)
"Aren't you a little old to be driving a sports car like that?"
"Oh good grief. I gotta go.

a simple life should allow for simple pleasures. what defines a simple pleasure? is cross-country skiing more of a simple pleasure than snowmobiling, just because the mechanism required to achieve it is simpler? or is a simple pleasure better defined by the visceral nature of the experience? in which case woodsman makes a strong point for the boxster.

a quote from my original "My Porsche is the bare basics of A to B travel, yet with my car it never feels like something used for travel. With all unessential weight, seats, and tech stripped away, every A to B trip feels like a long flowing poem featuring all the letters of the alphabet, maybe even "x." Less is more Thoreau was right in that." end quote.

Jake's feeling the flow! I predict a Porsche problem in your future Jake as , already, you appreciate quality and precision and are self-conscious enough to be aware of your interaction with it.:cheers:

but not cheaper than my old Miata! I think the cost of parts for aftermarket suspension, exhaust, intake, body work, and wheels, which all made it one hell of a fun car and EXCELLENT learning tool, was a wee fraction of the cost of the Boxster's similar upgrades.... with not really anymore more driving fun. Porsche parts are very over-prioced. Porsche after-market parts are severely over-priced.

good news school out tomorrow due to snow and ice! a few more days to finish my paper haha

If you use absurdity as a basis for your paper, you may well succeed, as long as illogic is consistent throughout your text.

This could be a winner. One of my college professors once challenged us to write an illogical paper. Not that easy to achieve.

BTW, if you're going to cite Henry David as a source for your paper, I challenge you to actually read his book "Walden" from cover to cover. My wife and I have been reading it to each other at night for about six months now, and we're almost at the halfway point. There's only so much Thoreau one can take! :barf:

Just sayin'.............

TO

I purchased a 986 because I wished to drive deliberately, to front only the essential facts of driving, and see if I could learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not truly driven.
:)
Keep working on Thoreau. The connection is there.

So... in your paradigm, how do you address someone asking, "Isn't the bare basics of A to B travel, walking?"

I have been an owner of both a '64 Dodge Dart (slant six, cast iron block, push-button transmission in the dash) that I bought for $50 in the 1978, and, more recently, my 2001 986 that I acquired late last year. Both were/are statement cars. In between was a dull series of SUVs and 4-door sedans. Yes, view your education as sacred, and get the most out of it despite the occasional short-sighted teacher. There is no price that can be placed on personal freedom. We all have our 'Walden Ponds'; I don't view it as conceited at all for HDT to have sought it out.

I think it is more ironic than anything, sure the back to basics angle why not. Essentially however, you have Thoreau who is retreating into nature as a sanctuary that is be overrun by industrialism much like peoples' lives. Yet, you are wishing to use a car as a parallel sanctuary to his. The car a symbolism of industry that is destroying nature. Just a tad ironic.