World-Changing Inventions People Thought Were Dumb Fads (I) 改变世界的“愚蠢”发明（上）

菲尔·爱德华兹 李小雪

In 1879， Henry Morton， a leading scientific mind and president of the Stevens Institute of Technology， called one man’s tinkering a “conspicuous failure.” The man was Thomas Edison. The invention was the light bulb.

That was obviously wrong， and the light bulb turned out to be a solid invention. But Morton’s statement was also revealing. Sometimes it’s genuinely difficult to know whether new inventions will be duds or hits. Who knows—maybe our grandkids will come to love Google Glass， Segways， and Dippin’ Dots.

Morton’s pronouncement shows just how hard it is to predict the future. In his case， he didn’t doubt that Edison’s lightbulb was useful. His main objection was that there was no way to carry electricity long distances and get light bulbs in every home （even Edison couldn’t figure that out on his own）. Forecasting the fate of a new invention often means forecasting broad social and technological changes—and that’s incredibly hard.

With that in mind， here’s a look at seven other important inventions—from the bicycle to nail polish to the answering machine—that had their doubters early on. There’s a lot to learn from wrong predictions：

Bicycles： “The popularity of the wheel is doomed”

Today， we think of bikes as a major source of transportation， but they started out as a trendy fashion statement. That’s why some critics were skeptical that they’d stick around （spoiler： they did）.

Bikes had a rapid rise： on August 20， 1890， The Washington Post called bicycling a hot fad for fancy ladies and not just for the “bleached-haired， music-hall type” anymore （read： hipsters）. The craze was driven by improved technology， as big-wheeled bikes became closer to the ones we use today. The bicycle’s growth was so rapid that on February 29， 1896， The Washington Post called bicycling the national sport.

But then the fad faded. On August 17， 1902， the Post called bicycling a passing fancy， and experts declared “the popularity of the wheel is doomed.” Critics thought bikes were unsafe， impossible to improve， and ultimately impractical for everyday use. On December 31， 1906， The New York Sun rendered its verdict： “As a fad cycling is dead， and few individuals now ride for all the good they claim to see in the pastime when it was fashion.”

The Sun turned out to be wrong. Over the years， bikes acquired better tires， and sturdier frame. America’s roads also got smoother. That made bicycles an increasingly practical option—and not just a passing fad.

Automobiles： “The prices will never be sufficiently low”

In 1902， The New York Times called the automobile impractical —and they had a few good reasons why. In the wake of the bike fad of the 1890s， reporters and analysts were wary of the “next big thing” in transportation. As one critic put it：

Automobiling is following the history of cycling with such remarkable closeness in almost every detail， both as a sport and an industry， that the question is often asked if the present period of expansion will be followed by a collapse as complete and as disastrous as was that of the cycling boom of a few short years ago.

The Times complained that the price of cars “will never be sufficiently low to make them as widely popular as were bicycles.” It didn’t help that some of the early proposals for an auto-centric transportation system were outlandish. In 1902， The Steel Roads Committee of the Automobile Club of America was angling for a steel highway system. Bizarre proposals like that made it harder to believe the car would ever make it big.

But it did. Once Henry Ford perfected the mass production of automobiles， the price came down and cars took off， eventually becoming the dominant form of transportation.

Liquid nail polish was a “strange and unique fad”

In 1917， Cutex invented the closest thing to modern mass-market liquid nail polish. But it took a while for nail polish to hit the mainstream. In 1927， The New York Times reported on it as a “London fad，” and the year before， writer Viola Paris took to the pages of Vogue to assess the new invention. “There seems to be some doubt，” she wrote， “in the minds of a great many women as to whether nail polish is in any way harmful or， at least， not so good for the nails as the powder or paste polish.”

As late as March 31， 1932， the Atlanta Daily World questioned how long colored fingernails could possibly stick around. “Dame fashion， whimsical and wayward as the wind，” the paper snarked， “has so many strange and unique fads that her latest vagary， that of tinting the fingernails... has become quite popular.”

Ultimately， nail polish wasn’t just a passing fancy. Better manufacturing processes， a new age of mass marketing， and clear advantages over powders and pastes helped it stick around.           ■

Talkies： “Talking doesn’t belong in pictures”

In 1928， Joseph Schenck， President of United Artists， seemed confident about one thing： talking pictures were a fad.

He told the New York Times that “talking doesn’t belong in pictures.” Though he conceded that sound effects could be useful， he felt that dialogue was overrated. “I don’t think people will want talking pictures long，” he said， and he wasn’t alone.

In 1967， actress Mary Astor recalled the mood when the silent era drew to a close. She wrote， “The Jazz Singer was considered a box-office freak，” and that talkies were “a box-office gimmick.” In an early talkie screening， she and her colleagues thought “the noise would simply drive audiences from the theaters... we were in an entirely different medium.”

In the end， however， talkies proved out to be more compelling than the old mediums. Audiences adjusted， audio-recording technology improved， and a new generation of Hollywood bigwigs embraced dialogue.

Cheeseburgers： “Typical of California”

Most sources credit Lionel Sternberger with inventing the cheeseburger in 1934， though there’s a lot of debate. Regardless of who came up with it， the notion of beef and cheese was initially regarded as a crazy California novelty rather than as a revelation.

The first time the New York Times wrote about cheeseburgers in 1938， they ranked the burgers as a Californian eccentricity， putting them third in a list along with nutburgers， porkburgers， and turkeyburgers. In 1947， a Times writer actually deigned to try a cheeseburger， albeit skeptically：

At first， the combination of beef with cheese and tomatoes， which are sometimes used， may seem bizarre. If you reflect a bit， you’ll understand that the combination is sound gastronomically.

In the end， plenty of people agreed that the cheeseburger was “sound gastronomically.” And once fast food chains—like McDonald’s—included it on their menus， it was guaranteed a place on the American plate.

Answering machines： “In the beginning， it was pure yuppie.”

It didn’t take long for people to see how answering machines could be useful. But when they were first introduced， it seemed like the telephone companies would squash them in favor of their own hardware and services.

In 1973， a story about the bourgeoning voicemail phenomenon noted that answering machines weren’t even allowed in most homes. Robert Howard， a spokesman for the New York Telephone Company， claimed that illegally installed machines posed a hazard to line repairmen. Since the 1940s， most companies had banned them， and AT&T said “there is no need for the device.”

Even once answering machines moved from quasi-legal purgatory in 1975， thanks to an FCC decision， the devices were still seen as a niche yuppie annoyance. That might be why it took until 1991 for the New York Times to reluctantly accept answering machines with a telling headline： “For Yuppies， Now Plain Folks Too.”

The answering machine made it big because technology， laws， and telephone culture changed. Answering-machine technology became easier to manage and answering services faded away.

Laptops： “Was the laptop dream an illusion？”

In 1985， the New York Times report-

ed on the tragic demise of a once promising trend—laptops， the newspaper said， were on their way out. From now on， airplane tray tables would hold beers and cocktails instead of computers.

The Times doubted the potential of laptop technology， and with good reason： they were heavy， pricey， and had poor battery life， all of which made it hard to imagine them becoming mainstream.

It was a reasonable complaint， but short-sighted：

The limitations come from what people actually do with computers， as opposed to what the marketers expect them to do. On the whole， people don’t want to lug a computer with them to the beach or on a train to while away hours they would rather spend reading the sports or business section of the newspaper. Somehow， the microcomputer industry has assumed that everyone would love to have a keyboard grafted on as an extension of their fingers. It just is not so.

Laptops took a few more years to become practical， but technology improved enough that the laptop became lighter， more durable， and easier to use.

1879年，史蒂文斯理工学院的首席科学家兼院长亨利·莫顿称一名男子的忙活根本就是“徒劳无功”。这名男子是托马斯·爱迪生，而这项发明是灯泡。

莫顿那么说显然不对。最终证明，灯泡是一项卓越的发明。但是他的言论也揭示了一个道理：有時，真的很难断定新发明会百无一用，还是会风行一时。谁知道呢？也许我们的孙辈会爱上谷歌眼镜、赛格威电动平衡车和得意点液氮冰激凌。

莫顿的声明还告诉我们，未来多么的难以预测。就他而言，他并不是怀疑爱迪生的灯泡是否有用，他主要是觉得远距离输电不可行，电灯无法普及到户，所以才加以反对。即便是爱迪生也不可能独立解决这个问题。预测一项新发明的命运常常意味着要预见广泛的社会和技术变革，这的确难于上青天。

明白了这一点，我们不妨一起看看起初也曾遭人质疑的其他七项重要发：自行车、指甲油、答录机等。错误的预测中也有颇多可以学习之处。

自行车：“轮子注定风头不再”

如今我们把自行车当作重要的交通工具，而在其诞生初期，自行车是新潮时尚的代名词。也正因如此，有些批评者怀疑它们能否长久流行下去（打脸：它们的确长存！）。

自行车可谓是一朝崛起：1890年8月20日，《华盛顿邮报》称自行车不只是“染白头发的杂耍人员”（即嬉皮士）的专用品，也是时髦女郎的心头爱。当时的技术取得了进展，使大轮自行车更加接近我们现在所骑的自行车，因而引发了这阵风潮。自行车的数量一路飙涨，到了1896年2月29日，《华盛顿邮报》称骑自行车已为全民运动。

但接着这股狂热就退却了。1902年8月17日，《邮报》称骑自行车已经过时，专家们也宣称“轮子注定风头不再”。批评者认为自行车不安全、没有改进空间，因而终究不适用于日常出行。1906年12月31日，《纽约太阳报》提交了对自行车的宣判：“自行车只是昙花一现，今已消亡。流行骑自行车的时候，很多人声称作为消遣自行车有种种好处，但现在，他们当中也很少有人骑了。”

最终证明，《纽约太阳报》错了。数年后，自行车的轮胎越发厚实，车架越发坚固，美国的道路也越发平坦。因此，自行车日益成为实用的出行工具，并非昙花一现。

汽车：“价格永远不会亲民”

1902年，《纽约时报》称汽车不实用——他们的确言之有理。19世纪90年代自行车的风潮过后，记者和分析家们就很警惕交通界的“下一个宠儿”。正如一位批评家所言：

汽车紧跟自行车的步伐，不论是作为一项运动，还是一个产业，两者几乎在各个方面都惊人地相似，所以总有人怀疑，汽车是否会重蹈几年前自行车的覆辙，此时虽是风风火火，彼时却落得轰然倒塌、一败涂地的下场。

《纽约时报》还发牢骚，说汽车的价格“永远不会降至亲民，让其像自行车那样普及民众”。早期有人提议建立以汽车为中心的交通体系，这些提议当时被认为实属荒诞，毫无助益。1902年，美国汽车俱乐部钢铁公路委员会还谋求建立一条钢铁公路系统。类似的离奇提议使人们更难相信汽车会做大。

但汽车确实做大了。亨利·福特刚一完善汽车的批量生产线，价格便急转直下，汽车随之流行起来，最终成为了主要的交通工具。

指甲油是一阵“古怪而独特的潮流”

1917年，蔻丹公司发明了最接近现代大众化指甲油的东西。但是过了一段时间，指甲油才成为主流。1927年，《纽约时报》报道了指甲油，称之为一股“伦敦潮流”。而1926年，作家薇奥拉·帕里斯就在Vogue杂志上用了几页篇幅来评估这项新发明。她写道：“很多女性心目中似乎有些疑惑，指甲油是否对人体有害？或者至少它不如指甲粉或指甲膏对指甲益处大吧？”

迟至1932年3月31日，《亚特兰大世界日报》发出质疑，涂色的指甲还能挺多久？该报出言不逊，称“女性时尚，如风一样突如其来、任性难测，不乏种种古怪而独特的潮流。最近一次突发奇想则是给指甲染色，现已蔚然成风。”

指甲油终究不只是一时的潮流。生产程序的改良，大众市场时代的来临，以及它相对指甲粉和指甲膏的显著优势，都促使它一路坚挺。              □

（未完待续）

有声电影：“有声对白不属于电影”

1928年，艺术家联合会的主席约瑟夫·申克似乎对一件事情把握十足：有声电影只会风光一时。

他对《纽约时报》说：“有声对白不属于电影”。虽然他也承认音效颇有用处，但他觉得对白被高估了。他说：“我觉得人们不会喜欢有声电影太久。”这种想法在当时并不罕见。

1967年，女演员玛丽·阿斯特回忆了默片时代落幕之际的氛围。她写道：“《爵士歌王》被视为一部卖座怪片”，有声电影被看作是“票房噱头”。在早期的一部有声电影上映时，她和同事们都认为“噪音肯定会把观众从剧院吓跑……我们处于一种完全不同的媒介中。”

然而，事实最终证明，有声电影比旧的媒介更引人入胜。观众适应了有声对白，音频录制技术取得了进步，新一代的好莱坞大亨们也纷纷拥抱了有声电影。

奶酪汉堡：“典型的加利福尼亚怪味”

虽然争议不断，大多数资料都将1934年奶酪汉堡的发明归功于莱昂内尔·斯滕伯格。不论是谁想到了这个主意，刚开始的时候，人们都认为把牛肉和奶酪搭在一起是个疯狂的点子，是一种故作新奇的加利福尼亚吃法，而非别出心裁的美食。

1938年，《纽约时报》首次报道了奶酪汉堡，把它评定为一种加利福尼亚怪食，与坚果汉堡、猪肉汉堡、火鸡汉堡一起上榜，位列第三。1947年，尽管疑惑，《时报》的一位作者还是亲自尝了尝奶酪汉堡：

“如今牛肉、奶酪、番茄不时被搭在一起，乍一尝，可能有些不同寻常。但稍作回味，就会发现它们其实只是看起来搭配合理而已。”

后来许多人也持相同的看法。可一旦像麦当劳这样的快餐连锁把奶酪汉堡印上了菜单，它就在美国人的餐盘上牢牢占据了一席之地。

答录机：“起初不过是雅皮士的玩意儿”

虽然答录机的实用价值很快就为人们所认知，但它在问世之初，似乎遭到了电话公司的打压，因为这些公司更想推行自己的设备和服务。

1973年，一则关于语言信箱正蓬勃发展的报道指出，在大多数家庭里，是禁止安装答录机的。罗伯特·霍华德是纽约电话公司的一名发言人，他声称，非法安装答录机会给电话线维修人员造成安全隐患。其实自20世纪40年代以来，大多数公司都禁了答录机。美国电话电报公司曾说“这种服务没有市场。”

多亏了美国联邦通信委员会的一项决议，答录机于1975年摆脱了此前种种近乎合法的刁难，但它仍然被视为是少数雅皮士的玩意儿，不受待见。也许正因如此，一直等到1991年，《纽约时报》才不情愿地接受了答录机，刊出了醒目的头条：“雅皮士爱之，普通人亦然。”

答录机的崛起源于技术、法律以及通信文化的变革。随着答录机技术变得更易操控，代接电话服务便逐渐消亡了。

便携电脑：“便携电脑只是虚空一梦？”

1985年，《纽约时报》报道说，曾经前景大好、而今悲剧谢幕的新潮产品——便携电脑正在走向穷途末路。从此以后，飞机上的小桌板將不会放置电脑，取而代之的是啤酒和鸡尾酒。

《时报》质疑便携电脑的潜能，也算是有理有据：它们体型笨重、价格昂贵、电池不耐用。这些缺陷使得人们很难想象便携电脑可以成为主流。

以下这份抱怨虽合理，但缺乏远见：

种种局限源于人们实际使用电脑所做的事情，而非营销者期待它们能做的事情。总体而言，为了消遣起见，人们并不想拖着电脑去海滩或上火车，反倒更愿意阅读报纸上的体育或商业版面。然而，微电脑行业却料定每个人都会乐于拥有一个键盘，仿佛嫁接在他们的手指上，使其延长。可事实并不如愿。

虽然便携式电脑过了好几年才臻于实用，但技术的突飞猛进使它们不仅更加轻便，也更持久易用。□