Recently, while doing a little research for a thread, I surveyed the Net in an attempt to collect some sense of modern bonzer design. There’s a lot out there. but fairly quickly it became clear that the term bonzer has lost virtually all significance. I’m sure that some will have a problem with that statement, but honestly, it appears that you can slap the name ‘bonzer’ on just about anything now - as noun, adjective, adverb or verb. But the problem isn’t unique to ‘bonzer’.
Gunny fish?
During a recent swell I overheard a conversation between two drop-in artists.
Fool one: “….blah blah… it’s a gunny fish”
Fool two: “Man, you’re covered! … blah blah …”
I normally try and block out the blather, but ‘gunny fish’ did get my attention. It seemed to sum up my recent research into bonzers.
Fool three, four, …
If when you read ‘gunny fish’ a little something inside your head said ‘I got’ta see one of those!’ then you’re part of the problem, and you wouldn’t be alone. Really, if such a beast actually existed who wouldn’t be a bit curious?
Marketing is wonderful. Sure something is being lost here, but I guess something is being gained too, at least by the genius that slapped ‘gunny fish’ on his lastest creation.
Actually, on bigger days I wonder if he takes out his fishy gun? Oh wait a minute, on bigger days he probably just calls his gunny fish a fishy gun… wow, he is covered!.. genius is humbling.
If I’m not mistaken, the word “bonzer” (not the design itself) is a registered trademark, in the US as well as certain other countries, for at least one class of goods (surfboards), and, I’m assuming, for t-shirts and apparel. So, regardless of whether or not the word becomes an eponym for double-concaved, multi-finned surfboards, technically, the owner(s) of that trademark have exclusive rights to its use in commerce.
If, say, Simon Anderson had registered “Thruster” for his tri-fin design, he or his company would have had exclusive rights to the use of the name in commerce.
Jet Ski, Windsurfer, Frgidaire and Kleenex are all good examples of trademarks which become eponymous with the product itself.
I’ll take your word for it, regarding the copyright that is. I didn’t look into that component when I was doing my cursory survey of bonzers.
My point was made in mild frustration. I’m still seem to be interpreting a lot of what I thought was established terminology as having some functional significance, aside from commercial rights.
I hope I didn’t seem like jerk, its just that Malcolm’s a good friend, and I’ve watched the bonzer(®) saga unfold over the years, and I’m stoked that he’s finally reaping some benefits and recognition.
He told me a few times that he doesn’t mind if people make them and call them bonzers, just that they get them right…
Also, tangentially, I’ve seen a little bit of how the heavy hand of big corporate money operates, which is why I think its cool that people are on this site sharing their own labors of love, and not worrying too much about all that other stuff.
As far as “established terminology” and “functional significance”, well, that’s a can o’ worms of a whole different color.
ps I’m not lurking here, honest- I’m between lam and hotcoats…
