Soren, thanks for your explanation of why you like this ship and find her so attractive. I have looked at various pictures of her to try and understand her appeal. I regret though that she just doesn't 'do it' for me. To my eyes the bow is blunt and the bridge is unremarkable and utilitarian - and the structure above it aggressively angular. Although her stern has curving lines the over all design of the ship is very angular and with very strong horizontal lines. The funnel seems at odds with these lines, being rather too small and weak (and the dark blue that NCL uses is just wrong). I have no problem with people liking modern design, as long as it is good and I have to say that I personally don't regard this vessel as being an example of good (attractive)design - even though she may be efficient as a cruise ship.

Soren, I am 62, but I herewith & herenow believe that you are on a very right 'trace'.
Just imagine now, you-me-other gents inclusive, cruising on a 'nice-beautiful-fantastic-cute-stunning' passenger steamship of 1939 with clouds of coal smoke covering the upper passenger deck.
Wouldn't it be an unforgettable wonderful experience, uh,uh!

Luko P.: Thanks, that sounds reasonable to me :-)

Clive: Okay, since You ask I like the bow and bridge - both from the side and (especially) full frontal! I also like her stern and funnel design...

I think we never will agree and define the real "beauty" in case of these ships...
I'm just 24 years old and when I first gained interest in cruise ships back in the end of the 1990's, the new ships of that time already started to look "big and boxy"...
I grew up with these ships being build and launched in a still increasing number, and to me the old classics looked too old-fashioned and somehow out of time... Just like everything else the times inevitably change, and so does the ship designs. I guess some of You have been growing up with the old, classic liners as the only cruise ships sailing the seas? It was the ones that fascinated You back then (and still does) and therefore they are "the real" cruise ships to You?

I would prefer no hull graphics, but otherwise, I would agree with Soeren. A fairly clean looking ship. Don't compare these to traditional ships. It's a totally different breed.

Hi Luko: Yes I'd agree with that....gear testing, I'm sure.
Soren: Just another point of view. As you say, Beauty...etc. But I must say...I think the paint job is just "Crap" Totally unnecessary, does nothing for anyone. Least of the vessel itself.
(Maybe Denis thought the bag was for vomit.)(Quite understandable.)

OK Soren, tell us one thing that you find to be beautiful about this ship.

Hello Soeren. The bag (or so-called 'water bag') is most probably in use as a proof weight for testing davits or other lifting gear. Rgds, Luko

Denis: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder!! ...And I disagree with You.

I wonder what the yellow "bag" on her port side is?

Tasteless ship.