From a 9-19-98 BP response:

>First of all, I see nothing wrong with standardization. In an increasingly
complex technological world, standardization facilitates the timely
achievement of levels of human activity that are unparalleled in previous
times. The writer mistakes variable standards and mass marketing
forconspiracy to promote intrusion on somebody's sense of aesthetics or
architectural values.<

I beleive conspiracy requires coordinated intent. I suggested none and see
none. To the contrary, I feel it is the focus on individual gains that lead to
the "unintentional" alignment of mass marketing and mass production. I don't
beleive McDonald's created the postage stamp burger to improve society as we
know it.

>I would suggest that the goal of all of us who work in the area of
technological
development is to eliminate or reduce to the absolute minimum society's
reliance on craftsmanship. And I would argue that most tradesman like it
that way.<

Once these tradesmen have put themselves out of work, by eliminating society's
reliance on craftsmeanship, do they get a job at McDonald's?

>McDonald's marketing success was that they could train anyone to do any
job, producing a consistent product (albeit a not-so-great one) within 15
minutes........even if we wish they had set a higher standard for
the finished product. <

It seems plausible that the standards to which McDonald's works are the
highest possible standards at which this robot worker machine can function at
an acceptable (to McDonald's) profit margin. The artifact (burger) is that
which the machine is capable of.  As with a hand joined barn, or a hand joined
table, the hand made burger is a different (better?) entity. Hopefully the
"good consumers" will not lose the ability to differentiate.

Just hurling I guess.

Rudy Christian