It seems there are different philosophies to approach rallying and clearly those two ends don't meet now.

Personally I see as a sport where organizers prepare a route that the competitors must pass as fast as possible. What lies behind the next corner is for the competitor to survive. Variety is everything. Rallies shouldn't be about guaranteed finishing.

Speaking about foundations of rallying, it's obvious it's born from upper class past time fun in early 1900s Central Europe. Those rallies had hardly any similarities to rallying what we have known for the past 55-60 years or so. Nordic events come into picture when the modern speed tests, special stages, were introduced. It happened simultaneously in many countries, but Nordic rallies bear a role. To link this all to this current discussion, and to provoke a little, Nordic influence on rallying is what makes the tarmac events nowadays sooooo dangerous.