Was it about the airline or the guitar?

Like the rest of the country I truly enjoyed Dave Carroll’s musical treatment of the confrontation between United Airlines and his guitar, and while most consider it a cautionary tale for the airline industry and its customer relation and PR policies, I’m looking at it from the other angle, the guitar’s. Here’s the story, and the vid follows.

Mr. Carroll could easily have left the guitar’s brand generic, but he chose to identify it as a Taylor. I’m no mind-reader, but I think it’s safe to assume he did so because for guitarists, the destruction of a Taylor is particularly tragic, and not just because Taylors fetch top-dollar. The instruments and the company are highly regarded and, in my opinion (I own one,) deservedly so. Without getting too nichey about it, I’d say it’s because the company radiates quality and innovation as manifested in their products. That’s something consumers can pick up on, something they appreciate, even revere in a culture of too many  compromised, throw-away products. While I don’t know how this story nets out for United, I know it’s a win for Taylor.

As for the video, who can’t love it? But part of me wanted to hear a short, awful sounding guitar break played on a busted guitar. Too much?