Director

Director (pronounced dih-rek-ter or dahy-rek-ter)

(1) A person or thing that directs others or other things (Director of Engineering, Director of Sales etc).

(2) In corporate law, one of a group of persons chosen to control or govern the affairs of a company or corporation, usually as a member of a board of directors and sometimes also including executive functions.

(3) The person responsible for the interpretive aspects of a stage, film, or television production; the person who supervises the integration of all the elements, as acting, staging, lighting etc.

(4) In musical or other artistic productions (stage, art galleries, opera etc) one in charge of all artistic (and sometimes administrative) matters (in larger operations the roles sometimes specialized: sound director, script director etc).

(5) The manager or chief executive of certain schools, institutes, government bureaux etc.

(6) In military use, a mechanical or electronic device that continuously calculates firing data for use against an airplane or other moving target, configured usually graphically to display (in real-time) the targets of a weapons system.

(7) In chemistry, the common axis of symmetry of the molecules of a liquid crystal.

(8) In music, a synonym for conductor (US use, now less common).

(9) A counsellor, confessor, or spiritual guide (now less common).

1470-1480: The construct was direct(us) + -or.  A borrowing in the sense of “a guide” from the Anglo French directour & the French directeur the agent noun from the Latin dirigere (set straight, arrange; give a particular direction to) and its source, the Late Latin directorem, from the Latin dīrectus, the perfect passive participle of dīrigō (straighten, direct), the construct being dis- (asunder, in pieces, apart, in two) + regō (to direct, to guide, keep straight; make straight; rule), from the primitive Indo-European root reg (move in a straight line).  The -or suffix was from the Middle English -our, from the Old French -eor, from the Latin -ātor and reinforced by the Old French -or and its source, the Latin -tor & -tōrem.  It was used to create an agent noun, often from a verb, indicating a person or object (often machines or parts of them) that do the verb or part of speech with which they are formed.  In electrical engineering it has the specific use of being appended to the names of members of classes of components, especially those that have an extensive property name of the same root suffixed with -ance (eg to convey the sense that resistors possess resistance and inductors possess inductance).  The alternative spelling directour became rare in the late eighteenth century and is long obsolete.  Director, directorate & directorship are nouns, directing is a verb, directed is a verb & adjective, directorial is an adjective and directorially is an adverb; the noun plural is directors.  The feminine forms of the noun (directress & directrix) were always rare and are now thought extinct (and by some probably proscribed).

Lindsay Lohan with Spanish fashion designer Estrella Arch (b 1974), on the catwalk, Emanuel Ungaro's Spring-Summer show, Paris, October 2009.  Ms Lohan was employed as a creative director at the House, founded in 1965 by French fashion designer Emanuel Ungaro (1933–2019).

The noun director (corporate sense of “one of a number of persons having authority to manage the affairs of a company” was known as early as the 1630s; the theatrical sense of “the leader of a company of performers” dates from 1911 and it was from here the use was picked up by those in charge of the artistic or technical aspects of movie-making.  The noun directorship (condition or office of a director) has been in use since the 1720s, the adjective directorial known since 1770.  The noun directorate was used first in 1834 of “a body of directors” and may immediately have be used individually of the “office of a director” but this was certainly first documented in 1837.  Director is a word defined both by its history of use (film director, director of football etc) and law (company director) so although titles like supervisor, head, manager, leader, administrator, chief, boss etc certainly implies “one who directs”, they’re traditionally not used as direct synonyms because “director” is a “loaded word”.  It’s also modified as needed (art director, managing director, sub-director etc).

1967 Imperial Crown Coupe with "Mobile Director Package"; note the rearward facing front passenger seat.  

Although the brand had since the 1920s been used for some of Chrysler's more expensive lines, between 1955-1975, the corporation re-created Imperial as a separate, stand-alone division (albeit with some intra-corporate sharing of engines, transmissions and certain other components), the way Ford positioned Lincoln (GM's (General Motors) Cadillac then still with unique engines although much else was shared).  In the early years, the approach yielded some success (most notably with the dramatic 1957 models) but the separation didn’t survive the troubled decade of the 1970s (by which time the platform and body-shells were shared with the other divisions and much of the earlier distinctiveness had been surrendered); a couple of subsequent, half-heated, revivals proved abortive.

Bowing to economic reality, the Imperial in 1967-1968 had switched from the separate frame used since 1955 to the unitary construction of the full-sized ranges offered by other divisions but maintained a certain degree of difference by virtue of a unique body, albeit one with dimensions slightly reduced (not seen by all as a virtue at a time when things were again trending larger).  While styled with an elegance derived from its simplicity of line, the Imperial continued to not quite match the timeless modernity of the Lincoln or the indefinable but incomparable allure of the Cadillac and although sales did improve in 1967, volumes were only ever a fraction of its two competitors.  The basic engineering though was sound, the TorqueFlite 727 transmission as responsive and robust as any (although it didn’t quite slur as effortlessly between ratios as the Cadillac’s TH400 Turbo-Hydramatic 400) while the 440 cubic inch (7.2 litre) V8 was a notch better, something the others wouldn’t match until 1968.  Significantly, reviewers at the time often were prepared to acknowledge the Imperial was the more capable road car although, given it operated in a market where quietness and isolation from the environment were afforded more of a premium than handling prowess, among potential buyers, any perception of real-world advantage probably was marginal.

The more stylish if less roadable opposition: 1967 Cadillac Coupe DeVille (left) & 1967 Lincoln Continental Coupe (right).

In those years however, the Imperial did offer something truly unique.  The “Mobile Director Package” was available exclusively on the Imperial Crown Coupe and reflected (within the limits of what the available technology would then permit) what Chrysler thought a company director would most value in an automobile being used as a kind of “office on the move”, including (1) an extendable walnut-topped table (secured to the floor by a stainless-steel stanchion) able to be unfolded over the rear seats, (2) a Tensor high-intensity lamp with a gooseneck mount enabling the light to be directed anywhere in the cabin and, most intriguingly (3) a front passenger seat mounted on swivelling base enabling it to rotate 180°, the apparatus permitting someone comfortably to use the table and interact with those in the rear.  Conveniently, in a sign of the times, the car was supplied with four cigarette lighters and the lamp could be plugged into whichever was closest to need.  The package was available only for those two seasons and in its first years cost US$597.40 (some US$6,000 adjusted for 2026 values) but only 81 buyers ticked the option box and even reducing the price the next season to US$317.60 did little to stimulate demand; only 70 ordered as a dismal swansong.  Even if the threat of new safety regulations hadn’t been looming, it’s doubtful the Mobile Director Package would have appeared on the option list for 1969 when the new “fuselage” Imperials debuted.

Imperial's advertising always emphasised the "business" aspect of the package but the corporation also circulated a photograph of the table supporting a (presumably magnetic) chessboard and another with silver compote holding a shiny red apple and a bunch of grapes, dangling seductively.  The latter may have been to suggest the utility of the package when stopping for a picnic with one's secretary; at an advertising agency, once someone suggested using the motif of "forbidden fruit", nobody would have been able to resist.

The advertising copy at the time claimed the package was “designed for the busy executive who must continue his work while he travels”, serving also as “an informal conference lounge”.  The Imperial was a big car (previous generations had been larger still) though “lounge” was a bit of a stretch but “truth in advertising” laws were then not quite as onerous as they would become.  More accurate were the engineering details, the table able to “pivot to any of four different positions, supported by a sturdy chrome-plated pillar and in the forward position, it can convert into a padded armrest between the two front seats while extended, it opens out to twice its original size with a lever on the table swivel support to permit adjustments to the height”.  It was noted “a special tool is used for removing the table and storing it in the trunk” the unstated implication presumably that in deference to the secretary’s finger-nails, that would be a task for one’s chauffeur.  The US$597.40 the option listed at in 1967 needs to be compared with the others available and only the most elaborate of the two AC (air conditioning) systems was more expensive.

Imperial option list, 1967.

1967 Imperial Crown Coupe with Mobile Director Package.  Note seatbelt mounting point.

The publicity material associated with the Mobile Director Package did suggest the rearward-facing seat would likely be occupied by a director’s secretary and, as one might imagine, the configuration did preclude her (in 1967, secretaries almost always were women) using a seatbelt but she would always have been in arm’s reach of at least one cigarette lighter so there was that.  The (male) end of the front seatbelts sat on the sill panel, adjacent to the seat’s squab (back), a placement dictated by the need not to restrict access to the rear-compartment and that worked well for the standard coupe but, obviously, rendered the belt useless when the seat was rotated.  While Chrysler can be criticized for not providing rearward-facing secretaries with what’s now regarded as an essential safety feature, the rest of the US industry and legislatures (federal & state) were in 1967 little less cavalier.  While some state registration authorities had during the decade mandated the provision of seatbelts for front-seat passengers, no US jurisdiction then compelled their use.

The familiar modern three-point (lap & sash) seatbelt evolved in the late 1950s with much input from US designers but it was Swedish manufacturers that first made them universal (Scandinavia being often dark and icy, drivers sharing the roads with large elk).  The modern seatbelt design (conceptually unchanged to this day) is credited to Swedish mechanical engineer Nils Bohlin (1920–2002) who was employed by Volvo, the company making them a standard fitting in 1959, following the example of Saab that had added them the previous year.  During the 1960s, US states gradually imposed a requirement they be fitted until federal law mandated they be installed in all passenger vehicles produced after 1 January, 1968.  The laws requiring people actually to use the things proved more difficult to implement but other countries quickly made both fitment and use compulsory, initially only for those seated in the front but eventually this extended to all passengers.  Although examples existed early in the twentieth century (fitted often by those with experience in aviation) rudimentary seatbelts first appeared in US production cars during the 1950s but the manufacturers must have thought the public indifferent because their few gestures were tentative such as in 1956 when Ford had offered (as an extra-cost option) a bundle of safety features called the “Lifeguard Design” package that included:

(1) Padded dashboards (to reduce head injuries).

(2) Recessed steering wheel hub (to minimize chest injuries).

(3) Seat belts (front lap belts only)

(4) Stronger door latches (preventing doors flying open in a crash)

(5) Shatter-resistant rear-view mirror (reducing injuries caused by from broken glass).

In Western popular culture and advertising, there have been many friendly bears, including this one happily buckled-up with a “Ford seat belt. One third stronger than required for airliners.”

The standard features included (1) the Safety-Swivel Rear View Mirror, (2) the Deep-Center Steering Wheel with recessed post and bend-away spokes and (3) Double-Grip Door Latches with interlocking striker plate overlaps.  Optional at additional cost were (4) Seat Belts (single kit, front or rear, color-keyed, nylon-rayon with quick one-handed adjust/release aluminium buckle) (US$5).  There were also "bundles" (always popular in Detroit), “Safety Package A” consisting of a Padded Instrument Panel & Padded Sun Visors (US$18) while “Safety Package B” added to that Front-Seat Lap Seat Belts (US$27).  On the 1956 Thunderbird (with a significantly different interior design) the options were (1) the Lifeguard Padded Instrument Panel (US$22.65), (2) Lifeguard Padded Sun Visors (US$9) and (3) Lifeguard Seat Belts (US$14).

Years later, internal documents would be discovered revealing conflicts within the corporation, the marketing department opposed to any mention of "safety features" because that reminded potential customers of car crashes; they would prefer they focus on new colors, higher power outputs, sleek new lines and such.  So, with not much done to promote the “Lifeguard Design”, public demand was subdued and soon the option quietly was deleted.  At the time, apart from improving the quality of roads (resulting in higher average speeds with obvious implications) the government had done little about either safety or vehicle emissions but both the rising highway death toll and the worsening air quality in cities was attracting attention, meaning things would change, decades of legislation soon to unfold.  The first decisive step came as a provision in FMVSS 208 (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208) requiring all passenger cars manufactured from 1 January, 1968 onward be equipped with seatbelts at the designated seating positions though this was a federal manufacturing requirement, not a law requiring motorists to buckle up, something not imposed until 1984 when New York made their use mandatory, other states following the lead.

FMVSS emerged from the US NHSB (National Highway Safety Bureau (that in 1970 became the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) under the newly created DOT (Department of Transportation), established by an act of Congress on 15 October, 1966 and beginning operation on 1 April, 1967).  That alphabet soup of activity in a field previously little explored by government came in the wake of the publication of Ralph Nader’s (b 1934) book Unsafe at any Speed (1965) documenting the flaws in the design and construction of US automobiles and industry’s indifference to the consequences.  Regulation ever since has been a growing industry, something emblematic of a theme in Western political culture since the end of World War II (1939-1945): The erosion of personal freedom in exchange for perceived (or dictated) benefits (in the case of the FMVSS, safer cars; other agencies gave us cleaner air).  All of this is fought out in various fora (legislatures, the streets, social media, Fox News etc); sometimes the state giveth, sometimes the state taketh away.

The profound recent shift in this mechanism is not the process but the participants: As “big tech” became dominant, that collective gave much to consumers who benefited from what appeared substantially to be “free” while surrendering much that was once by philosophers and political scientists thought precious but which clearly is regarded by many as an abstraction, the loss of which is a price worth paying for TikTok, Instagram, generative AI (artificial intelligence) and such.  In that, big tech’s model is essentially the same as that of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) and that seems to have worked well so we should imagine, as the twenty-first century unfolds, we’ll get “more of the same”.  In political theory, what the social contract theorists at big tech are doing is right because we all have clicked on the boxes agreeing to their 30-plus pages of terms and conditions and have certified we have read and understood every clause.  The political process handling this societal overlay is neither static nor lineal; structurally it follows much the same pattern as earlier contests between power and individuals: As governments react to pressure groups by seeking to curb the worst of the consequences, fixes, work-arounds and obfuscations will interact with a flow of money into the coffers of governments, parties (and, now and again, pockets) in a way that will permit most of what big tech plans to do while giving the appearance things are being done to stop them doing at least some of what many people think they should stop doing.  To anyone who remembers the maneuvers and compromises that for more than a decade would flow around the best-laid plans of the NHTSA, it will all be familiar.

1968 Imperial Crown Coupe with Mobile Director Package.  The seatbelt (lap only) was now attached directly to the frame.

Imperial’s designers were compelled by the law to be more imaginative than most.  For the swivelling front seat in the 1968 cars, the seatbelt mounting points were integrated directly into the steel frame of the seat base itself, rather than the vehicle's floor pan.  To achieve the necessary strength, (using techniques borrowed from the seats in airliners), the engineers had both inboard and outboard lap-belt ends bolt directly to reinforced anchor points on the lower structural framing of the seat.  This made seat, mechanism and belts wholly self-contained (a la a military aircraft’s ejector-seat!) and permitted the 180^o swivel effect, belts rotating seamlessly with passenger.  Chrysler did however obtain from the authorities a partial-exemption.  While FMVSS 208 required front-seat shoulder belts, that would have been difficult to implement for the swivelling seat (not impossible because ejector-seats have frame-mounted shoulder-belts) so the restraint system was limited to the two-point lap-belt (admittedly an improvement over what she'd been provided in 1967: nothing).  Secretaries on the move presumably were grateful but the safety feature didn’t see sales improve, despite the slashing of the price.

1966 Chrysler 300X show car.

In 1966, the “swivelling seat thing” must have been exerting a powerful influence in Chrysler’s design offices because also shown that year was the 300X, based on a 300 Convertible (and despite the appended letter, a vehicle not in the tradition of the just-retired “letter series” 300s (1955-1965), the “X” believed a reference to eXperimental) and although mechanically unchanged, the cockpit was packed with “futuristic” ideas, some of which did eventually enter mainstream use (although the swivelling front seat remained one of history’s unwanted orphans).  Rather than a conventional steering wheel, the driver used handgrips and the “steering unit” included button controls for lights, wipers, turn signals, and door locks, enabling use of all functions with a finger or thumb, all the while keeping a both hands on the mechanism.  Door handles were replaced by a keypunch card used also for the ignition while a truck-lid mounted TV camera and monitor on the dashboard replaced the rear-view mirrors.  Rear-seat passengers (and the front-occupant when “swivelled”) were able to enjoy watching a small television, mounted on a bracket allowing it to be stowed away when not in use. Construction of the 300X was out-sourced to the prolific customizer and fabricator Roger Winfield (1927–2025) whose creations became well-known from their appearances in film and television including Blade Runner (1982) and Get Smart (1965-1970).  The 1965 Sunbeam “Tiger” be built for Get Smart was actually a visually almost identical Sunbeam Alpine, chosen because its compactfour-cylinder engine left sufficient under-hood space for the “special accessories” (including a retractable machine-gun) whereas the Tiger’s Ford V8 filled the space to the brim.  To solve the “aural deficit”, the distinctive burble of a Tiger’s V8 was added during the editing process.

1969 Ford Aurora II Concept Car.

The most obvious thing that might puzzle those first seeing the Mobile Director Package is why it was available only in a two-door model when four-door coachwork would seem to make the configuration more obviously functional.  Had Imperial in 1967 sold several thousand of the things it’s at least possible Chrysler would for 1968 (or even mid-way through 1967) had extended availability but that would have been a more demanding process than it may appear, the existing swivelling mechanism unable to be used.  The difficulty was the four-door models (both sedan and hardtop) had respectively a full or partial B-pillar, the latter ending at the belt-line where the greenhouse begins, the structure required to provide a secure anchor point for the rear door's hinges.  The coupes used doors longer than front units on the four-door models, meaning the B-pillar sat further forward than the trailing-edge of the coupe’s door; there was thus a sufficient aperture for the seat to rotate when the coupe’s door was open but the gap would have been too narrow on the four-door cars.  So to offer the package in the four-door body it would have been a matter either of re-designing the doors or the swivelling seat and while the former would have been an expensive exercise (prohibitively so if the only justification was to accommodate a low-volume option), the seat and its base could have been re-engineered but after finding only 81 buyers in 1967 and 70 the next season, investment would have been hard to justify.

1960 Facel Vega Excellence EX1 (left) and 1959 Lancia Appia Series III (right).  Facel Vega produced France's finest cars of the post-war era but while undeniably glamourous, the flaws in the design of the Excellence's door-latches were never resolved and by the time the factory was shuttered in 1964, total Excellence production stood at 148 EX1s (Series One; 1958-1961) & 8 EX2s (Series Two; 1961-1964).  Lancia perfected pillar-free body engineering, using doors with sturdy window frames, permitting latch points at both sill and roof, the configuration offered on a number of sedans including the Ardea (1939-1953), Aurelia (1950-1958) & Appia (1953-1963).  The locking mechanism was intricate but the engineering was simple and proved reliable.  It's sad the company's later attachment to FWD (front wheel drive) ultimately doomed Lancia because in every other aspect of engineering, few others were as adept at producing such fine small-displacement vehicles.

1969 Ford Aurora II Concept Car.

Ford's 1969 Aurora II Concept Car gave an indication of quite what what would have been required to make the Mobile Director Package conveniently functional on the platform of what was then the standard "full-size" four-door US automobile.  The "wrap-around" rear seat was an idea borrowed from the Ford Thunderbird, contemporary reviewers praising the visual impact but noting that as something for humans to sit on it was less comfortable than a conventional design; in the Aurora it probably worked better and certainly lent the cabin the desired "lounge-room" vibe.  The problem of providing (1) space for the seat to swivel and (2) allowing elegant ingress & egress was of course afforded by the the four doors (in "suicide" configuration) and elimination of the B-pillar.  That combination provided unprecedented ease of accessibility but its doubtful it could successfully have been implemented in series-production.  The French concern had earlier tried the approach with their Excellence model but, despite retaining a vestigial hump where a B-pillar would have attached to the sill, the company never solved the problem of the door-locking apparatus "springing open" while the car was in motion, usually when the mechanism was subject to lateral forces such as when cornering.  Because these forces could be exerted at high-speed, having doors suddenly "flying open" was an obvious safety concern.  Lancia in the 1950s solved the problem of doing without a fixed central pillar buy using doors with conventional, full-height frames, thereby enabling locking mechanisms to be fitted top & bottom.  Curiously, the Aurora was based on the LTD Country Squire that came only with fully-framed doors so Lancia's approach could have been adopted but there's no indication Ford ever contemplated series-production, the "concept car" created just to generate interest on the show circuit.

1967 Imperial Crown Convertible (with subsequently added Mobile Direct Package).

Imperial over two seasons might have managed to sell only 151 of the Mobile Director Packages but one owner of a 1967 Crown Convertible was so smitten they cannibalized a coupe to create a unique (if wholly fake) "convertible Mobile Director".  Exactly emulating what the factory did would not have been as simple as it may appear because the floor under the passengers swivelling seat needed to be strengthened with additional bracing and a "baffle" was welded to the transmission tunnel where the table's stainless-steel stanchion was attached (off-set to the driver's side to avoid the drive-shaft).  Although apparently as significantly pointless as the original, it's a novelty that would attract interest at events like "cars & coffee" and may even be more functional in that it would seem an ideal place comfortably to sit and enjoy one's picnic while watching something like polo (on the model of the way the Country Life set re-purpose the tailgates on their Range Rovers).  That said, had the factory in 1967-1968 made the package available on the convertible, almost certainly it would have been just as unsuccessful as the coupe. 

Stewart-Warner's desk-based DataFax (circa 1958).  The process of miniaturization in electronics was by 1966 still embryonic but enough shrinkage had been attained to make a fax fit in Imperial's show car.  Unlike fax machines, the pencil skirt never goes out of style.

The specification of Chrysler's package as it appeared in showrooms for the 1967 season was actually modest compared with the “Mobile Executive” car the corporation sent around the show circuit a year earlier; that Imperial had been fitted with a telephone, Dictaphone, writing table, fax machine, reading lamp and stereophonic sound system; a typewriter and portable television also used in many displays although neither were "fitted".  Also a Crown Coupe, the 1966 show car was much more ambitious, anticipating advances in mobile communications that would emerge over the next quarter-century.  At the time, car phones were available (the first service in the US offered in certain cities in 1946) but they were expensive and the nature of the bandwidth, combined with a lack of data compression, meant the range was limited as was capacity, only several dozen calls able simultaneously to be sustained.  In the 1966 car, there had even been the novelty of a Stewart-Warner Datafax, able to send or receive a US Letter-sized (slightly smaller than A4) page of text in six minutes.  That sounds unimpressive in the 2020s (or compared even with the 14.4 kbit/s for Group 3 FaxStream services of the 1990s) but the appropriate comparison is with the contemporary alternatives (driving, walking, a courier, or using the US Mail) and six minutes would have been a considerable advance.  While more expensive than a stamp and envelope, for the target market the costs would anyway have been a legitimate business expense and thus "a deductible".  As it was, the tempting equipment awaited improvements in infrastructure such as the analogue networks of the 1980s and later cellular roll-outs, these technologies contributing to an extent of use delivering economies of scale that eventually would make possible the smartphone.

The 1966 car that toured the show circuit demonstrated the concept which, in simplified form, would the next year appear on the option list but things like telephones and fax machines anticipated the future by many years (although fax machines in cars (Audi and Toyota among the handful to offer them) never became a thing).  The Dictaphone did however make the list as one of Chrysler's RPOs (regular production options) in the early 1970s and the take-up rate was surprisingly high although the fad quickly passed, dealers reporting the customers saying the hardware worked well but they "never used them".  In the collector community, a surviving Dictaphone in something like a Plymouth 'Cuda is a minor attraction; while not increasing value as would something like and original Hemi V8, it is a legitimate "period piece".

Glovebox-mounted fax machine in 1995 Toyota Celsior (the JDM (Japanese Domestic Market) Lexus LS).

The problem with the scaled-down Datafax was even had it been possible to produce the things at a manageable cost, in 1966 the solid-state electronics that would have made the thing reliable when subject to constant vibration and jolts were still years away (Chrysler’s Bendix “Electrojector” fuel injection in 1958 had fewer moving parts and that didn’t end well).  However, even if reliability could have been "engineered in", there is no guarantee demand would have existed whatever the price-point.  In the 1990s, despite it being installed with Toyota’s typical neatness and attention to detail, there were few buyers for the "fax machine in the glovebox" and if the notion was going to catch on anywhere, it would have been in that nation of early adopters.  While there were many features in the 1966 300X truly that were "ahead of their time", the Mobile Direct Package was a genuine cul-de-sac, at least as implemented in a conventionally sized car (and certainly a two-door coupe).  In 1966, rearward-facing seats had for some years been seen in the "vis-à-vis" arrangement used in some LWB (long wheelbase) limousines and as child-seats in the rear-most compartments of station wagons but those seats had been either fixed or folding and although the Ford Aurora II presumably dazzled a few impressionable souls, the industry showed little inclination to follow Chrysler's swivelling lead.

2021 "Maybach-Look" Mercedes-Benz Metris.  The passenger compartment is a similar configuration as the 1966-1967 Imperials (two forward facing seats, two rearward ("fold-away" rather than swivelling)) and there were folding tables as well as features unimaginable in the 1960s (seat massage, starlight-pattern headliner, flatscreen TV, internet connectivity, touchscreen infotainment system and a Burmester sound system with subwoofers).  Unfortunately, a fax machine wasn't part of the build but by 2021, they were close to extinct even in bricks & mortar offices.   

Flawed though Chrysler's implementation in 1966-1967 may have been, in the twenty-first century, production-line economics made it possible to realise the concept's implications, "big-box" vans able to be outfitted as genuinely functional mobile offices from which communication can be maintained with just about any part of the planet.  Of course, based on the same body used by plumbers, Amazon delivery drivers and such, the Metris doesn't have quite the gravitas of the Mercedes-Benz 600 Grossers of old (it's debatable whether the faux "Maybach-Look" stuff makes things better or worse) but there's more interior space and room for a big-screen TV so it's all a matter of what one wants from life.  Noting that, some operations have fitted-out interiors as offices or luxury transports which eschewing the exterior bling, some (often wisely) preferring to travel as inconspicuously as possible.      

Cabriolet

Cabriolet (pronounced kab-ree-uh-ley)

(1) A light, two-wheeled, one-horse carriage with a folding top, capable of seating two persons.  It's from cabriolet the term "cab" (in the sense of taxi) was derived).

(2) An automobile based usually on a two-door coupé but with a folding top.

(3) The equivalent continental term for the (mostly UK) drophead coupé (DHC) or the more generic "convertible".

1766: From the French cabriolet, the construct being the Italian cabriole (horse caper) +‎ -et (the suffix here used in the sense of “smaller version”).  The Italian cabriole was from the Latin capreolus (wild goat), from the primitive Indo-European kápros (buck, he-goat) and related to the Old Norse hafr (he-goat), the Old English hæfr, the Welsh gafr and the Old Irish gabor.  The seemingly strange relationship between the Latin capreolus (roebuck; wild goat) and the eighteenth century horse-drawn carriage is explained by the French cabriole (little caper), the meaning derived from its light movement, from cabrioler (to leap, caper), from the Italian capriolare (to somersault), from the Latin capreolus (roebuck; wild goat), the idea being of something light and agile in movement.  The larger, more upscale version of the lightweight carriages the French named cabriolet, “cab” being the common form in the vernacular, picked up in English and used to this day, "cabbies" being "cab (taxi) drivers".  The –et suffix, indicating diminution or affection, was from Old French -et, and its feminine variant -ette, both derived from the Late Latin -ittus (and the other gender forms -itta, -ittum).  In English use, “cab” was picked up to describe the small carriages for hire in urban use and it was the descendants of these which became “taxicabs” when the French taximètres (automatic meter that records distance and fare) were adopted in the late 1890s, the word from the German Taxameter, from Taxanom, the construct based on Taxe (tax, charge or scale of charges), from the Medieval Latin taxa (tax, charge) + mètre.  Cabriolet is a noun, the noun plural is cabriolets.

1978 Cadillac Eldorado Cabriolet Astroroof.  The "Cabriolet Astroroof" (Option code CF5) added US$1565.00 over the Eldorado's base price of US$12401.00.  "Astroroof" was Cadillac's marketing term for a sunroof with a large, heavily tinted glass sliding panel.

The application of cabriolet to describe convertible cars emerged in the early years of the continental motor industry because of the conceptual similarity to the earlier, light, horse-drawn two-seater carriages but as the years went by, rapidly the industry retreated from the "terminological exactitude" stuck to by the coach-builders of the horse & buggy era.  The "carried over" nomenclature (cabriolet, landau, brougham etc) eventually became mere "model names" and what some styled a "cabriolet", others might call something else although usually "cabriolet" did imply some part of the roof could in some way be removed.  By 1977, GM (General Motors had decided that was a tiresome restriction and offered the "Cadillac Coupe DeVille Cabriolet d’Elegance" the rationale for the "cabriolet" element being the roof looked like it might be able to be lowered.  The structure was however fixed but the model sold well so for more than a decades Cadillac "cabriolets" appeared with solidly attached roofs.  Anyone looking up "cabriolet" in a dictionary may have been baffled but Cadillac owners knew what they wanted.

1979 Cadillac DeVille Custom Phaeton Coupe.  Those looking up "phaeton" may also have been mystified.

The 1977 venture may also have encouraged long model names because that trend persisted into the next century.  So what was used to describe the variations in convertible coachwork became something of the manufacturer's whim (except for the much later targa; Porsche had the foresight to register that as a trademark) and if a car was called a roadster, drophead coupé, phaeton, cabriolet or landau, it was an indication only that the roof could (usually) be removed or folded back.  In Detroit, the industry cheerfully used the historic names just as ways to impart "a certain association with something" and produced both "cabriolets" & "landaus" with fixed roofs and that trickery wasn't confined to the US, it being common practice in pre-war Europe for coupés to appear with non-functional "landau irons"; these were early "faux cabriolets".  One exception to that looseness was Daimler-Benz, the Germans tightly defining the specifications of roadsters and landaulets and, with Teutonic thoroughness, in the mid-twentieth century codified the five variations of Mercedes-Benz cabriolets as Cabriolet A, B, C, D & F (if ever there was a Cabriolet E, the factory’s definition has never surfaced).  With the fixed-roof two door bodies, "Coupé A" and "Coupé B" followed the same model (relating to seating & side windows).

Lindsay Lohan alighting from Porsche 911 Carrera (997) cabriolet, Los Angeles, 2012.

Being a German company, Porsche from its early years used "cabriolet" to describe its soft-top models although the Americans never really embraced the idea, habitually calling the open 356s "convertibles".  Strangely, Volkswagen owners in the US took to the term, "cabriolet" usually preferred for the Karmann-built soft-top Beetles, the cabriolet in 1979 the last of the classic (Type 1, 1938-2003) Beetles sold in the US.  After the targa (a word diligently trade-marked although Triumph in the UK had offered something similar (though more complex) with the "Surrey Top", available on the TR4 (1961-1967) & TR5 (1967-1968 (TR250 in the US market)) models were introduced, there was anyway a reason for Porsche to avoid "convertible" as being "imprecise"; at that point, in the Porsche ecosystem, there were "coupés" & "Targas".  The 1970s were, as a general principle not "convertible-friendly" but as that troubled decade ended, it became obvious the regulatory environment was not going to become as restrictive as had been feared and at the 1981 Frankfurt Motor Show, Porsche showed an AWD (all-wheel-drive) 911 cabriolet concept that was so well-received a 911 Cabriolet the next year was added to the line, the company's first "full convertible" since the last of the 356s (1948-1965).  Just to clarify things, the press were informed there were no "convertibles" in the range, just "coupés", "Targas" and "cabriolets".  Such had been the enthusiasm generated by the 1981 concept-car it was obvious it would enter series-production but, upon release, the company confirmed it would not include the AWD and nor would the body-style be available with a turbocharged engine.  The rationale for that was the rather patronizing" "People who drive cabriolets neither need nor want AWD and 300 HP (horsepower) engines".  Amusingly, in an example of the way that in commerce "the customer is always right", where, regardless of "need", where there's "want" (ie demand), supply tends to follow and both features eventually were made available with the cabriolet body.

Saint John Paul II (1920–2005; pope 1978-2005) in  Ferrari Mondial cabriolet while on a visit to the Ferrari test track, Fiorano, Italy, 4 June 1988.  This is believed to be the fastest ever Popemobile.

The term "cabriolet" has over the decades been applied to convertible Ferraris but a convention seems to have emerged that exclusively it's now used for four seaters (that the factory admits are really 2+2s).  The factory has had 2+2 cabriolets in the line-up for a while, most recently the California (2008-2017), Portofino (2017-2023), Roma (2020-2026) and Amalfi (since 2026) but those used a conventional front-engine layout.  The Mondial (1980-1993) was mid-engined, making the accommodation of four within the cabin quite challenging and critics noted one of the compromises imposed was aesthetic, the body lacking Ferrari's usually lovely, lithe lines, something said also of its 2+2 predecessor, the fixed-roof 208 & 308 GT4 (sold as both a Dino and a Ferrari).  However, the practicality of the Mondial had great appeal and it was at the time one of the the most successful Ferraris ever made.  It was also something of a turning point, much thought having been put into the design, not only to ensure one basic specification could be sold in all markets but also that the cost of ownership would be lower by simplifying the servicing routines.  It was much improved as the years went by and made in four distinct generations but Ferrari have not since attempted another mid-engined 2+2 (the configuration of the Roma & Amalfi sometimes described as "front mid-engine" but such things are not listed with the classic "mid-engined" machines, all of which have the power-plant mounted behind the driver).

The classification of cabriolets by Daimler-Benz

Cabriolet A coachwork: 1937 Mercedes-Benz 540K (left), 1958 Mercedes-Benz 300 SC (centre) & 2017 Mercedes Maybach 6 (right).

A cabriolet with two doors, no rear-quarter window and room for two passengers.  Occasionally, cabriolet As would be built with provision for one additional passenger, seated sideways behind the front seats, an arrangement the factory would late use in the "Pagoda" roadsters (W113, 1963-1971) until outlawed by increasingly stringent US safety regulations.  With Mercedes-Benz, the tradition of the cabriolet A in the big, open two-seat convertible would survive only until the 300 S & 300 SC (W188, 1951-1958) although in 2017, the one-off Mercedes-Maybach 6 Cabriolet was displayed, probably the most extravagantly self-indulgent "big" two-seater seen since the inter-war (1919-1939) years.  That was mitigated somewhat by the electric power-train but series production was never considered.

Cabriolet B coachwork: 1970 Mercedes-Benz 280 SE 3.5 (left), 1993 Mercedes-Benz 300 CE (centre) & 2017 Mercedes-AMG S 650 (right).  As the S 650 illustrates, while the use of CAD (computer aided design) and wind tunnels can make shapes more aerodynamically efficient, they doesn't guarantee they'll emerge as more elegant.   

A cabriolet with two doors and room for four or five passengers, fitted with a rear-quarter window for the rear seat.  Other than when interrupted by World War II (1939-1945) and its aftermath, the cabriolet B was long a staple of the Mercedes-Benz line-up but between 1972-1992 there was a hiatus, fears that impending US legislation would outlaw convertible sales in that lucrative market meaning no two door variations were constructed on the new S-Class (W116, 1972-1980) platform and no convertible versions of the successor S-Class coupé (C126, 1981-1990) or the smaller (what would now be called "E-Class") coupé (C123, 1976-1984) were ever offered (although some third party suppliers did offer conversions, Crayford in the UK even sourcing the soft-tops for their C123 cabriolets from 1973 Ford Mustangs in US wrecking yards!).  In those years, the R107 (1971-1989) roadster was the sole convertible available, its sales outside the US sufficient to maintain profitability if the ban eventuated.  As things turned out, the ban never was imposed and the cabriolet B returned in the form of the E-Class A124 (1991-1997).  The "smaller" Cabriolet Bs have since remained available although restricted after 2023 to the even smaller C-Class (A236) and the brief return of a "big" Cabriolet B (the A217 S-Class, 2015-2020) seems an experiment unlikely soon to be repeated.

The feared ban on convertibles in the US is an amusing tale of interest to political scientists and economists.  FMVSS (federal motor vehicle safety standards) 208 (roll-over protection) was published in 1970 and one obvious implication was the banning of “real” convertibles in the US market; while the local manufacturers went to court to challenge some of the provisions in FMVSS 208, they made no attempt to prevent the demise of the convertible, sales of the configuration having fallen to the point the body-style was no longer offered in most lines and even without the intervention of government it’s likely availability would anyway further have been restricted to the odd specialist product.  Indeed, Chevrolet, aware of the coming edict, had in 1968 released the coupe version of the third generation (C3) Corvette as a kind of targa (the so-called “T-top” with removable roof panels), the remaining structure essentially a “roll-bar” able to “drive through” FMVSS 208.

Compliant and not with FMVSS 208 as drafted: 1978 Chevrolet Corvette Coupe with T-Top roof (left) and 1978 Chrysler New Yorker, the last of the four-door hardtops (right).

As things turned out, there was a a lobbying effort by the AIA (Automobile Importers of America, a multi-national aggregation representing manufacturers from Europe, the UK and Japan making good profits from convertibles; indeed, some (notably MG) wholly were dependent on convertibles in the US market) to to gain exemptions because for many, even apart from the US-derived profits, it was the volumes achieved there that made viable continuation of the lines in other markets.  In an example of the way government and industry in the US interact (mostly through the mechanism of “campaign financing” with lobbyists as intermediaries), in 1971 the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) granted a “temporary exemption” for convertibles from the rollover parameters, the "subset clause" set originally to expire on 31 August, 1977 (ie, the end of the 1977 model season), a date chosen because by then Detroit’s existing convertible lines were schedule to have reached their EoL (end of life).  The FMVSS 208 standards were otherwise maintained and that was what doomed to four-door hardtops which, lacking a central (B) pillar would have been prohibitively expensive to engineer into compliance.  However, late in 1972, an unexpected ruling from a federal court held FMVSS 208 existed under the provisions of the NTMVSA (National Traffic & Motor Vehicle Safety Act (1966)) and this was found to contain no statutory basis that could extend to the banning of convertibles: As explicitly the judgment stated, the act obligated the agency “to afford such vehicles special consideration.”  Detroit no more expected that than did the NHTSA but while the manufacturers were sanguine about no longer producing convertibles, the regulators were compelled to decide what to do about their regulation and, given Detroit’s attitude, they decided to "kick the can down the road" and simply extend the “temporary” exemption, nominating no end-date.  As does happen in politics, the "temporary" became "indefinite".

By the time the neo-liberal order began to take control in Washington after the election of Ronald Reagan (1911-2004; POTUS 1981-1989), the political zeitgeist shifted to a desire for "less" regulation and the exemption became "permanent", convertibles in the 1980s staging a comeback in the catalogues.  The indefinite extension of the "temporary exemption" of convertibles from FMVSS's roll-over standards created the curious anomaly that Chrysler could in theory have maintained a New Yorker convertible (had one existed) in production while being compelled to drop the four-door hardtop.  Market realities meant no Federal Court judge ever had to sit to resolve that and no manufacturer sought an exemption for the latter.  The last of the C3 (1968-1983) Corvette roadsters was produced in 1975, the style not revived in the line until a C4 (1984-1996) roadster was released in 1986.  Most relieved were the UK and European producers, their little roadsters highly profitable and perennially strong sellers in North America and while the AIA didn't get everything they asked for, they got convertibles and that allowed the life of many roadsters (some with roots in the 1950s) to be extended even into the mid-1990s by which time, in a sense, customers were buying "new vintage cars".        

1980 Mercedes-Benz 500 SLC.

The SLC (C107, 1971-1980) existed only because it was assumed convertible sales in the US would be banned so, with no S-Class, the "big coupé" role was fulfilled by the SLC, concocted by using a LWB (long wheelbase) version of the R107 roadster's platform with a rear seat and (non-pagoda) fixed roof.  Always expensive, the SLC sold well but it had also a career never envisaged when the product-planners were drawing-up the specifications; it was used as a rally car.  The big 450 SLC 5.0 (1977-1980) was one of the more improbable rally cars but it enjoyed success in long-distance events, in winning the Bandama Rally in Côte d'Ivoire an it's a footnote in the sport's history as the only V8-powered car to win a European rally; all 450 SLC 5.0s fitted with an automatic transmission which makes the thing more unusual still.        

Cabriolet C coachwork: 1937 Mercedes-Benz 540K (left), 1950 Jaguar Mark V Drophead Coupé (DHC) (centre) & 2020 Alvis TB60 DHC (continuation) (right).

A cabriolet with two doors and room for four or five passengers with no rear quarter window.  Most German manufacturers and virtually all coachbuilders kept the cabriolet C on the books throughout the inter-war period but in the post-war years, it was the British who did most to maintain the tradition, Bentley, Rolls-Royce, Daimler, Armstrong Siddeley and Alvis all offering the style and Alvis in 2018 actually re-commenced production of what they called their "continuation" series.  Unlike their latter day use by US manufacturers, the often fitted external "landau irons" genuinely were functional in the raising and lowering of the soft-top.  Thankfully, those "faux landau irons" no longer attract US designers but the motif endures in those building hearses with large expanses of sheet mental rather than glass, the devices to some extent disguising and "breaking up" what would otherwise be just "too much flat surface".  By contrast, on a cabriolet C, the expanse of fabric can lend elegance but one obvious drawback is the restricted visibility, the bulk creating blind-spots rearward, something to bring a wry smile to drivers of 1971 "Sportsroof" Ford Mustangs.

Cabriolet D coachwork: 1961 Mercedes-Benz 300d (left), 1967 Lincoln Continental (centre) & 2006 Mercedes-Benz Concept Ocean Drive (right). 

A cabriolet with four doors and room for four to six passengers.  Common in the 1930s, the four door convertible was rare by the mid 1950s and even Mercedes-Benz removed the 300c (W186, 1951-1957) Cabriolet D from the range when the 300d (W189, 1957-1962) was released in 1958.  However, although demand for such a machine was tiny, it wasn't non-existent and in 1959 it was announced the Cabriolet D would again be available to special order on the basis of POA (price on application), the cost depending on the specification requested; eventually, a further 65 were built.  That was the last of the line however and when "semi-convertible" coachwork was introduced for the 600 (der Grosser; W100, 1963-1981), the term "landaulet" was preferred and these came in two forms: (1) the so-called "short roof" in which the folding mechanism opened only over the rear-most section and (2) the (unofficially dubbed) "presidential", the fabric extending to the central partition (divider).  Other than a one-off on the SWB (short wheelbase) platform, there were 59 600 Landaulets, 12 of them the "presidential" version, two of which remain in the care of Kim Jong-Un (Kim III, b 1982; Supreme Leader of DPRK (Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea)) since 2011) who inherited (along with the rest of the DPRK and its people) from his equally illustrious ancestors.  Apart from the mouth-watering Concept Ocean Drive displayed in 2006, the factory has never hinted such things might return and, apart from truck-like off-road machines, nor has any other manufacturer since the last convertible Lincoln Continental left the line in 1967.  Remembered also for its connection to the limousine in which President John Kennedy (JFK, 1917–1963; POTUS 1961-1963) was assassinated, that association didn't dissuade his successor (Lyndon Johnson (LBJ, 1908–1973; VPOTUS 1961-1963 and POTUS 1963-1969) from owning one but even LBJ's presidential imprimatur didn't sufficiently stimulate sales and the four-door convertible coachwork didn't appear for 1968.  They were the last convertibles ever built by Lincoln.

Cabriolet F Coachwork: 1939 Mercedes-Benz 770K (W150) (left), 1961 Lincoln Continental (X-100 by Hess & Eisenhardt) (centre) & 1966 Mercedes-Benz 600 Landaulet in four-door, short roof configuration (right, which is not really a cabriolet F). 

A cabriolet with four doors, built on an extended wheelbase, usually for state or formal use with room for six or more passengers.  The rare cabriolet Fs were almost exclusively state or parade vehicles (although as used cars, they've been sometimes imaginatively re-purposed in the secondary market) and are now effectively extinct, driven from the market by security concerns and the lack of appropriate new vehicles upon which they could be based.  Politicians now feel much safer in armored cars, built sometimes on a light-truck chassis and the ones used by US presidents are now essentially "armored cars disguised as traditional (ie 1980s) Cadillac limousines.

1966 Mercedes-Benz 300 SE (W112) Cabriolet.  Lots of chrome on the W112 although, such was the attention to detail, some of the brightwork was polished brass. 

In the collector-car market, the two-door Mercedes-Benz W111 (1961-1971) & W112 (1962-1967) remain coveted and, as is usually the case, it's the convertibles that are most sought, even though the cabriolet lacks the coupé's lovely roofline.  Pedants note that although the W111s & W112s are technically a Coupé B & Cabriolet B in the factory's naming system, they're never referred to as such because no other configuration was offered in the two-door iterations.  The W112 (300 SE) is of interest too because of the moldings around the wheel arches, a feature which seen on some earlier models and the 600 Grosser.  Criticized by some when they appeared on the 600, the additional brightness on the W112 wasn't to everyone's taste (and it was a "delete option" when new) but it clearly had an enduring appeal because for decades, after-market suppliers found a ready market among those with later model Mercedes-Benz, BMWs, Jaguars and some others.  This is not approved by the purists and whether in chrome, stainless steel or anodised plastic (!) it makes no difference: the originality police insist if it wasn't done by the factory, it shouldn't be done.  It was a W112 Coupé (that had failed quality control inspection and was due to be scrapped!) that provided the test bed for the installation of the 600's 6.3 litre (386 cubic inch) V8 in a smaller platform and such was the transformative effect the project was approved for series-production although Daimler-Benz management was not convinced there would be sufficient demand for the "hot-rod" as a coupé or cabriolet and insisted it be released exclusively in four-door form.

Thus was begat the 300 SEL 6.3 (1968-1972) using the W109 platform (1965-1972) and it was for years was a favorite high-speed cruiser on the FRG's (Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Federal Republic of Germany; the old West Germany, 1949-1990) autobahns, drivers then even more than now not troubled by tiresome speed-limits.  It was a great success but there have been some who longed to combine the big V8 with the lovely coachwork of the coupé & cabriolet and a surprising number of these have been built although the standard of the engineering has varied, not all interpolating the 300 SEL 6.3's air suspension.  The finest of the breed were built by Wisconsin-based Karl Middelhauve (1932-2026) and while the term "guru" is these days tossed around entirely too much, truly Karl Middelhauve was "the 600 Guru".     

1971 Mercedes-Benz 280SE 3.5 Coupé (converted to a cabriolet).

This is one really to upset the originality police because: (1) it started life as a coupé before a roofectomy was performed, (2) the chrome (actually anodized plastic) wheel-arch moldings were never available on this model and (3) the Fuchs (Bundt) aluminum wheels have been chromed (and may anyway be reproductions, some of which are cast and not forged, as were the originals).  Such is the price premium a cabriolet will command over a comparable coupé, over the years, many have been tempted to cut but exactly to replicate what the factory did is harder than at first glance it seems.  It's not a matter simply of “removing the roof”, a correctly accomplished conversion demanding: (1) structural reinforcements, (2) a folding roof apparatus and (3) different rear-end body panels.  While from the belt-line down the coupé & cabriolet appear visually identical, the Cabriolet required extensive modifications to the underlying platform to compensate for the removal of the structural rigidity provided by the fixed steel roof.

Structural Reinforcement: (1) The cabriolet used a significantly heavier, thicker floor pan with welded-in boxed side members to prevent body flex and “scuttle (cowl) shake” and for those prepared to do things in a way that don’t exactly emulate the look of what the factory did all those years ago, using modern materials and engineering techniques it is now possible to achieve ever greater rigidity with less additional weight, the attraction being the changes remain hidden unless the car is viewed from below (ie on a hoist) or the carpets are removed for inspection. (2) The Cabriolet's windshield pillars (A-pillars) contain internal steel tubes, both to afford additional rollover protection and support the folding top mechanism, a mechanism heavy by the standards of such things.  (3) While the coupés were built with a structural steel shelf behind the rear seats, in the cabriolets this was replaced with a reinforced partition in which is housed the bulk of the folding roof.  (3) Without the roof’s C-pillar, the size and shape of the rear side windows subtly is different and these feature a unique chromed-frame designed to ensure a tight seal against the heavy weather-stripping of the fabric top (on the coupé the glass seals directly).

The multi-layered soft-top:  The Cabriolet’s folding roof is not (in an engineering sense) complex but the construction was both intricate and labor-intensive.  Almost wholly hand-fitted, the mechanism consisted of a padded outer layer, with a thick insulating bombast of horsehair as a middle layer, finished with a tailored interior headliner.

The Rear Body Panel Modifications: In the lower reaches of the conversion industry, this is the most neglected aspect and the easiest way to identify “a fake” although, unless the real thing is parked side-by-side, most would likely not tell the difference unless their eye is keen: (1) The trunk (boot) lid length is physically shorter on the factory-built cabriolets to accommodate the recessed storage well into which much of the soft-top folds meaning (2) the rear-desk-sheet metal (the panel between the back of the rear seat and the trunk opening) is is unique to the cabriolet, featuring a chrome-trimmed latching area for the soft top's boot.   

Mercedes-Benz 770K (W150; 1938-1943), Cabriolet D (top) and Cabriolet F (bottom).

With a variety of coachwork, all the second generation of the Großers (Grosser (Grand Mercedes)) were built on a chassis with a wheelbase of 3880 mm (152¾ inch).  In some four years, only 88 were built, most of which were allocated to senior figures in the Nazi Party, the Wehrmach (the armed forces) and the German state although a handful were gifted to foreign heads of state.  The 770K will forever be associated with Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) because until the outbreak of war the big Cabriolet F was his preferred parade car and one of the quirks in the factory's nomenclature is that while the body-styles Cabriolet A, B, C & D were defined and well-documented, there was a 770K Cabriolet F, but no Cabriolet E.  The W150 Cabriolet F was among the rarest of the 770Ks with only five made (the distinction the additional rear window in the passenger compartment).  The jump in the factory's designations from "D" to "F" obviously skipped "E" and because that didn't seem the typically precise German way of doing things, there was speculation that another type of open coachwork had been planned (though not necessarily on the 770K chassis) but never built because of the outbreak of war in 1939.  That's not impossible (some records were lost during the war) but the archives for the period have revealed nothing to support the speculation and the sometimes repeated assertion the "Cabriolet F" label was an allusion to "Führer" (the car's most infamous customer) is simply wrong because the designation first was used in the 1920s and was applied to the previous 770 Großer, the W07 (1931-1938).  The factory seems never to have commented on the "missing Cabriolet E" although, despite having a great sense of history, it doesn't much dwell on the company’s relationship with the state and party between 1933-1945.

Wedding ceremony day: Hermann Göring & Emmy Sonnemann, Berliner Dom (Berlin Protestant Cathedral), 11 April, 1935.

Curiously, the wedding car used by Hermann Göring (1893–1946; leading Nazi 1922-1945 and Reichsmarschall 1940-1945) for his (second) marriage to Emmy Sonnemann (1893-1973) was a Mercedes-Benz 500 K Cabriolet C and the photographs do suggest things were a little cramped once his corpulent form had been wedged into the back seat though his more slender bride looked content.  One of the grand public spectacles the Nazi regime (1933-1945) used as propaganda devices, the wedding received blanket coverage in newspapers and, for the following three days, each movie shown in German cinemas was preceded by a “newsreel” segment of “edited highlights” from the happy day.  That would have been a good “catch-up” for Germans unlucky enough not to have been able to listen to the live radio broadcast of the entire ceremony , carried over a then still novel “national hook-up”.  Adolf Hitler served as best man and, in an experience unfamiliar to both him and the groom, neither were the centre of attention, eyes of the audience and lens of the photographers alike focused on the bride.

Damenmode der 1930er-Jahre: "Gretchen mag´s mondän!" (1930s Women's Fashion: "Gretchen Likes It Sophisticated!").  Catalogue of the collection of the Münchner Stadtmuseum (Munich’s municipal museum).

General Göring wore a Luftwaffe (German Air Force) uniform in a new grayish-blue fabric chosen for the occasion while the bride was dressed in a heavy white satin gown (cut in the then fashionable “Gretchen fashion”) with wide puffed sleeves ending in tight-fitting cuffs.  The train was relatively short and born not by girls (as was then customary) by boys of the HJ (Hitlerjugend (the Hitler Youth)), possibly a deliberate adoption of a practice then usually restricted to royalty and the aristocracy.  From the cathedral, the motorcade travelled the short distance to the Deutsche Oper Berlin (Berlin Opera House).  As one of the party’s leading WAGs (wives & girlfriends), Frau Göring made a good start in staking her claim to the (unofficial) title First Lady des Reiches (First Lady of the Reich), serving as Hitler's hostess at many state functions.  It was however a keenly contest space and both Anna Elisabeth “Annelies” von Ribbentrop (née Henkell 1896-1973), wife of Joachim von Ribbentrop (1893–1946; Nazi Foreign Minister 1938-1945) and (especially) Johanna Maria Magdalena "Magda" Goebbels (née Ritschel 1901-1945), wife of Dr Joseph Goebbels (1897-1945; Nazi Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda 1933-1945) sought the honor and both were adept at Masonic-like plotting & scheming.  Frau Göring’s chances of success became doomed after Eva Braun ( 1912–1945) complained to Hitler that she was “mean to her” so the invitations “dried up” something that didn’t much worry her husband because although regarded almost to the end as Zweiter Mann des Reiches (Second Man of the Reich), he was never part of Hitler’s “inner social circle”.  Although the exact nature of their relationship remains contested, being the Führer’s concubine, Eva Braun could of course never be the Reich’s “First Lady” (her very identity was close to a state secret and she was unknown to most of the population) but, in the final hours of her life, she did gain the satisfaction of being made “Frau Hitler” so there was that.  Of course, long before that low-key wedding in the Führerbunker, the course of the war had meant becoming undisputed First Lady des Reiches was no longer the prize it once was, so what Eva Braun gained was something of a withered garland.

Gretchen fashion: Not many women on the high street dressed quite like this but the elements did appear in everyday garments.

“Gretchen fashion” (or “Gretchen-look”) was a term used for a fashion phenomenon much identified with post-Weimar Germany; like many such trends, it was a blend and the components were (1) traditional wholesomeness and (2) international glamour.  The first element was a reaction against the perception of Weimar as “decadent” (although that was always overstated and applied only to a tiny, highly visible minority), thus the choice of the name “Gretchen” as something archetypically German and most associated with modest, pure, rural woman (certainly not “rootless cosmopolitans”).  Nazi-era propaganda attempted to “nudge” women towards a makeup-free life focused on “…the three Ks - die Küche, die Kirche, die Kinder” (kitchen, church, and children), a phrase that first became popular during the second half of the nineteenth century but many women knew there was a variant with a fourth “K”: Kleider (Clothing) and while the rustic look was adopted, the Gretchen-look emerged as a hybrid that owed as much to Hollywood as Hannover.  Dresses shifted away from the boxy, drop-waist 1920s flapper silhouette and used instead fabrics cut on the diagonal (the bias cut) to elegantly skim curves and flare gently at the hem.  Weimar’s characteristic angularity and androgyny almost vanished (although the hats were too stylish to be forgotten and were carried-over), replaced by a classic hourglass silhouette, high, natural waistlines returning, often emphasized with slender belts or subtle ties with hemlines at mid-calf, tea-length or floor-length depending on the time of day.  A simplicity of line was dominant but delicate ruffles, puff sleeves and inventive (sometimes even asymmetric) necklines decorated with tie-neck bows or fabric flowers could be used to compliment feminine prints featuring romantic florals or polka dots.  Of course, it was also the art deco era and those motifs along with bold stripes often were seen.  Some in the Nazi Party may have aspired to make the country a totalitarian state but frocks proved a tough opponent and, defying their Führer, women still wore red lipstick, plucked their eyebrows into arches and varnished their nails.

Wedding day of Crown Prince Naruhito & Masako Owada san, Rolls-Royce Corniche III Convertible, 9 June, 1993.  The crown prince was notably more svelte than General Göring.

Because a bride (in wedding gown) will need to step through a fairly small gap when exiting (often while being photographed), a two-door cabriolet does seem a strange choice as a wedding car and why one of the big 770K Cabriolet F Open Tourers wasn’t used doesn’t seem anywhere discussed and of the many questions directed at Göring during his week-long cross-examination at the Nuremberg Trial (1945-1946); understandably perhaps, neither prosecution or defense counsel raised the matter so it’s left to speculation.  It may be the bride wanted something “more romantic” and “less masculine” so there would be the connotation of her “marrying the man rather than the state” and while that’s wholly fanciful, it does explain the seemingly inexplicable.  The use of a two-door cabriolet for a “state” wedding proved however not unique, Japanese Crown Prince Naruhito (b 1960, Emperor of Japan since 2019) appearing in a 1990 Rolls-Royce Corniche III Convertible (by then the factory had ceased calling them DHCs (drophead coupé) although in the twenty-first century DHC would get a nostalgic revival) for his wedding in 1993 to Masako Owada san (b 1963).  It was one of only two public appearances for the Corniche, later retired and replaced by a Toyota Century Royal with one-off four door cabriolet coachwork, something that doubtless will please brides in future weddings associated with the Chrysanthemum Throne.  Compared with 1935, there was by 1993 more material for content providers (then serving almost exclusively television and print media) but the crown prince’s wedding was still a major event (the day declared a national holiday) and, with the country having entered the first of its “lost decades”, the spectacle must have been a relief from tales of economic gloom.

How to really make a statement on one's wedding day: 1993 Rolls-Royce Corniche IV in red, on red, on red.

Although in the English-speaking world the traditional color for wedding cars is white (or a close variant such as cream), in Japanese culture both black and white vehicles are used and there are even specialized Hanayome Taxis (Bridal Taxis) in which the left side of the roof mechanically swings upward so ingress & egress can be elegant with no risk of disturbing intricately constructed “big hair”.  Usually, in vivid red, Kotobuki (congratulations; longevity; good fortune) banners appear on the sides of the wedding cars as a warning to other traffic of the vehicle’s “special purpose”.  One Japanese “wedding superstition” enforced with especial strictness is that a bridal car must never shift into reverse gear because “backing-up” symbolizes “returning home” (ie a looming divorce).  One famous mid-twentieth century tradition that has faded is the Yomeiri (Dowry) Truck, most associated with the Nagoya region.  There, the wedding motorcade was a convoy of trucks used to transport the bride's dowry and furniture to her new home, the vehicles wrapped in festive red-and-white Kohaku maku (striped banners).  Most symbolically, on the bed of the last truck was the newlywed’s brand-new car, wrapped in a large, bright red ribbon.  For the crown prince and princess, their traditional Shinto ceremony was conducted at the Kashiko-dokoro (Shrine of the Sun Goddess Amaterasu) within the grounds of the Imperial Palace grounds in Tokyo and while there were no dowry trucks (the palace already fully-furnished with microwave ovens, toasters and such), the Rolls-Royce was one of 46 vehicles in a motorcade stretching slightly beyond a quarter-mile (402 metres).

Not even Göring matched that scale although, being head of the Luftwaffe, he was able to arrange a fly-past of dozens of fighter aircraft, timed with Teutonic precision to appear over the cathedral just as the couple were walking down the steps to their waiting cabriolet.  The sybaritic Goering gathered titles as enthusiastically as later he would loot Europe of artworks; as well as heading the Luftwaffe, he was Premier of Prussia, Reich Minister of Aviation, general in command of anti-aircraft artillery, general of fliers, Grand Master of the Hunt, Master Forester of Germany, President of Reichstag, chief of the Prussian secret police and Director, State Theatres & Operas (in that capacity he granted Frau Sonnemann the title “State Actress by appointment”) so it wasn’t difficult for him to arrange “stuff for the wedding”.  Hundreds of thousands of Germans (not all of the Berliners) lined the Wilhelmstrasse (Wilhelm Street) and Unter den Linden (best translated as “Boulevard of the Lime Trees”) from the chancellery to the cathedral and seldom can a wedding have seen so men in such a variety of uniforms (at attire then adored by Germans).  Manpower not being a resource-allocation problem for Göring, some 30,000 young men from a variety of Nazi organizations formed a double row in order to keep the streets clear and, with the expected military precision, they stood at attention with right arms raised in the “Hitler salute” as the wedding motorcade passed by.  In a legal sense, the marriage had taken place the day before in a civil ceremony at Berlin City Hall, bride and groom signing the necessary paperwork confirming they were of “pure Aryan stock and free from hereditary disease” (millions of those not either in the ten years to follow being murdered by on Hitler’s orders) so the rituals in the church were essentially ceremonial and performed for the benefit of God rather than the state.  Reich Bishop Ludwig Mueller (1933-1945) officiated, choosing the New Testament’s Book of Revelation for his text (“Be thou faithful unto death and I will give you a crown of life.”):  “Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.”  Revelations 2:10 (King James Version of the Bible (KJV, 1611)).

The Blue Goose.  The image on the left is from the Búndesarchiv (German Federal Archives) and is stamped "1941", suggesting married life did not cause Göring to suffer weight-loss,

The car most famously associated with Göring was also a Mercedes-Benz convertible (though not a cabriolet): a 1937 540K (W29) Special Roadster.  The earlier 500K Special Roadster came to be called “the brightest glint of a golden age” and while the 540K SR wasn’t quite as rakish as its slightly smaller predecessor, that may have been a good thing because modifications had to be made the 540 to ensure Göring was “able to fit behind the wheel” and even then, things were “tight”.  His 540K SR was nicknamed das Blaue Gans (the Blue Goose) because Göring ordered it his favourite shade of Luftwaffe Blaue (used for the underside of reconnaissance aircraft) and he was sufficiently fond of the hue to have one of his (many) Reichsmarschall uniforms cut in a fabric dyed the same color.

Appointed in 1933 by Hitler to the newly created office of Reichsbischof de Deutsche Evangelische Kirche (Bishop for the Reich of the German Evangelical Church), Mueller, a Lutheran priest and undistinguished theologian had no obvious qualifications for the role other than being a devoted Nazi but for the Führer, that was enough.  In office, Mueller, even by the slight standards of the regime’s minor functionaries, proved singularity inept and far from uniting the German protestant churches as was his designated task, he proved a schismatic influence.  By 1937, it was obvious to Hitler he’d “backed a dud” and increasingly he abandoned his use of carrots in church matters, resorting to the stick “when required” but otherwise becoming indifferent, seemingly resigned to the party’s state of “semi-peaceful” co-existence with the churches.  Typically, despite his conspicuous failure, Mueller wasn’t dismissed but simply ignored, his sycophancy and repeated attempts at ingratiation with the regime proving pointless.  Still, he deserves credit for having been prophetic in his choice of text for Göring’s wedding although whether “Defendant Number One” at the Nuremberg Trial much dwelt on the words during the months he spent in his cell or as he stood to hear the IMT’s (International Military Tribunal) president sentence him to be hanged, isn’t known.