For the past four years, and for many years before that, I’ve seen mechanical engineering being invariably represented by gears. At least two of them together each time, both usually spur. If you’ve been perceptive of things around, you too would’ve seen much the same. Additionally, for evidence of this, run a Google Image search for “mechanical engineering” and crack how many of them have spur gears associated with them.
And all this when mechanical engineering is so vast a subject as to cover elements from safety pins to satellites.
Such a generalized outlook on mechanical engineering is likely in part because of the “age” of mechanical engineering, in part because of the popularity of gears, and in part because of the perception of ruthless operation people have about machines. I mention age because mechanical is one of the oldest branches of engineering, and since gears have been around for almost as long as the branch itself, they might subtly hint a feeling of its longevity. Secondly, it's hard to find someone that hasn't seen gears in action, be it in watches and clocks, motors, engines, turbines, vehicles, and a myriad other mechanical devices. Gears enjoy more popularity amongst us than any other tool of their league. Even if only the outside of an engine is visible, our mind immediately thinks of the gear mechanism inside. This undue familiarity of the common man with gears would naturally lead to, especially when present for long as suggested here, a generalized representation of the whole of mechanical engineering with the object of familiarity. Lastly, gears are ruthless! If you’ve seen two huge spur gears in action, you will know the kind of emotion they generate. And this emotion itself is representative of machines in general, making gears all the more symbolic of mechanical engineering.
But whether such symbolism is justified or not is an altogether different matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment