I’m still driving my 2002 PT Cruiser. Best car I ever owned.
See my post a bit up. I nominated several Nissans including the Cube.
I think Honda did the boxy car style correctly with the Element. Nissan Cube and Scion xB…nope!
It’s a fake! The window opening isn’t actually as big as the glass.
Fun fact: In parts of the world that are right hand drive, the asymmetry is flipped.
As long as you can see through all of the glass, you’ve got a good field of view, though, right?
What I mean is, here is the outside of a Cube, showing the back:
It looks like one big window wrapping around. Here is the opposite side:
I was meaning that the back window doesn’t go all the way to the edge, and that pillars are about the same on both sides. Though there is a small window on one side, which is why the RHD backs are reversed. So the visibility is almost the same as if the back didn’t have the asymmetrical styling, but not as big as it “pretends” to have.
But I still think they are more cool than ugly. 
Well, dang. I thought that was a single window with no obstructions, which would be damned useful.
Thanks for the clarification.
There’s always a balance to be struck between visibility (obstruction of view) and safety.
Rollover crashes can pancake cars that don’t have enough integrity from the various pillars in each vehicle’s design.
Pancaked cars have a tendency to be inhospitable to the car’s occupants 
But do they go well with butter and maple syrup?
Yeah, I can understand that. It’s still a bit disappointing.
I know what you mean. One day I got a chance to look in the windows close up. I don’t know if it was at a car show, or in the supermarket parking lot! 
I felt cheated somehow that it wasn’t one big window.
I, for one, appreciate car pillars.
IIRC the Toyota and Nissan vans were basically just Japanese delivery vans with seats in them. They were basically a stopgap until they could design a “real” minivan for the American market.
That’s because you don’t drive around the Japanese countryside, visiting onsen and solving mysteries. Yoinks!
I always thought the Corvair was a bit ugly.
Compared to its competitors, like the Plymouth Valiant, the Corvair was downright graceful.
Ever see the prototype for a Nash Wagon? Or a Gremlin/Jeep pickup? No idea what those AMC guys were smoking but…
The A pillars on the Element caused me to learn to look twice. I’ll suppose they were needed for structural support.
Sitting in the driver’s seat, you had to lean forward and look up to see the stoplight sometimes, so I got a little fresnel lens to place at the top of the windshield.
Interestingly (?) enough, the backseat passengers could look over the shoulders of the front seat. It was like stadium seating. Most of the time I left out the back seats and I could really haul quite a bit. Here’s some guy who uses it to haul his motorcycle.
https://www.reddit.com/r/motorcycles/comments/o9cvm/this_is_how_i_haul_my_bikes_honda_element/
Wikipedia says
The name “Corvair” originated as a portmanteau of Corvette and Bel Air,[1] a name first applied in 1954 to a Corvette-based concept with a hardtop fastback-styled roof, part of the Motorama traveling exhibition.[2]
How did two good-looking parents generate a child like that?
Chrysler did produce some ugly monstrosities. But in later years, the Valiant became a perfectly ordinary, if boring, car. My older brother had one for a while and IIRC, it was the car in which I learned to drive (and was probably the car in which I took – and passed – my driver’s test). So, a bit of nostalgic love here for the Valiant.
Before the HR-V in that wreck, we had an Element. It was great. I could haul a full-size range, and that was just with the back seats flipped up on the sides (great feature). Great for having dogs, too.
My Element was all gloss black. It looked fine. The ones that had those gigantic plastic panels were ugly.
I had thought about nominating some early 1960s Chrysler product, but I guess I just didn’t get around to it. They did indeed go through a period from about 1960-62 where they had some really strange designs.
And even the famed Lincoln Continental went through an ugly period from 1958-60, with those strange canted headlights.
1948 studebaker convertible. Man that is one fugly car!
That’s from the era where Chrysler’s styling was “put a small box on top of a bigger box.” Other than the Cuda/Challenger, I think everything from 1968 to about 1971 was that way.