Electra

Electra (pronounced ih-lek-truh)

(1) In Greek mythology, (also as Elektra or Laodice), any of several mythical women, most famously as the daughter of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra; she incited her brother Orestes to avenge the death of their father by killing his murderess Clytemnestra and her lover Aegisthus.

(2) In Astronomy, one of the six visible stars in the Pleiades.

(3) A female given name from Ancient Greek (now rare).

(4) In psychoanalytic theory, as “Electra complex”, a young girl's sub-conscious competition with her mother for her father's affection.  Still much associated Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), the term was in 1913 coined by Carl Jung (1875–1961) but Freud, proprietorial in such matters, added layers to his “Oedipus complex” (originally detailing a son's sexual attitude towards his mother and concomitant hostility toward his father) publishing the refinement as the “feminine Oedipus attitude”.  It can (generously) be interpreted as Freud’s contribution to gender-equality.

First century BC (of the name, although the literary tradition stretched back several millenia): From the Ancient Greek Ἠλέκτρα (Ēléktra (literally “shining bright)), from ἤλεκτρον (ḗlektron) (amber) and related to ἠλέκτωρ (ēléktōr) (shining sun; beaming sun).  Although etymologists regard the possibility as dubious, there may be a connection with the Sanskrit उल्का (ulkā́) (meteor) and/or the Latin Vulcānus (god of fire and metalworking) and the Ancient Greek ἥλιος (hḗlios) (sun).  The ultimate source may even be pre-Greek so it’s not surprising the exacting lexicographers list the origin as “uncertain”.  The Latin noun ēlectra was the nominative/accusative/vocative plural of ēlectrum (from Ancient Greek ḗlektron) and the best known adaptation was electrum (amber; an alloy of gold and silver, used in Antiquity and now specifically a natural alloy with between 20 and 50 per cent silver (once commonly called “German silver plate).  Electra is a proper noun; the noun plural is Electras (about the only use of the plural form is of sopranos or Buicks).

The legend of Electra (Ηλέκτρα)

While some of the myths of Antiquity have a unique storyline and there are characters who appear in a single role with a known lineage, in many cases the tales are tangled and figures from one myth may appear in others with different parents and children.  As an example, consider the literary career of Electra who variously was (1) One of the daughters of Oceanus and Tethys, who married Thaumas and then gave birth to Iris and to the Harpies; (2) One of Persephone's companions and was present when she was carried off by Hades; (3) One of the Pléiades.  Zeus fathered her child Dardanus who left Samothrace and went to the Troad, where he founded the royal dynasty of Troy.  Electra had another son, Iasion.  Electra is also said to have had a third son, named Emathion, who ruled over Samothrace, but more frequently this third child of hers by Zeus is named as Harmonia; (4) In the Italian version of Electra's legend, she was the wife of the Etruscan King Corythus and Dardanus and Iasion were born in Italy; (4) Electra is also linked to the legend of the Palladium.  She was later transformed with her sisters into the constellation of the Pleiades.

Elektra (Frankfurt, 1953).

The 1967 recording of Richard Strauss's (1864–1949) Elektra with Swedish soprano Birgit Nilsson (1918–2005) and the Wiener Philharmoniker (Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra) under Hungarian-British conductor, Sir Georg Solti (1912–1997) is regarded still by many critics as the finest studio recording.  Given the virtuosity on show, it's hard to argue but among the opera cognoscenti there’s a faction that insists Electra's hatreds and lust for vengeance were never better captured than in the 1953 recording with German soprano Inge Borkh (1921–2018) and the Sinfonieorchester dem Hessischen Rundfunk (Frankfurt Radio Symphony Orchestra of the state of Hesse), under German composer and conductor Kurt Schröder (1888–1962), a release noted also for German mezzo-soprano Christa Ludwig's (1928–2021) appearance as first maid.  In all the repertoire of opera, Electra is one of the roles demanding much range from a soprano and listeners can choose the Electra they prefer: technical ecstasy or thrilling intensity.

Most famously however she was (6) the daughter of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra.  After Agamemnon was murdered by Aegisthus and Clytemnestra, Electra was treated as a slave, spared only on the intervention of her mother.  In some accounts Electra saved her brother (the young Orestes) by entrusting him to their old tutor who took him away from Mycenae.  To prevent her giving birth to a son who might avenge her father, Electra was either married to a peasant who lived far from the city, or, having been betrothed to Castor and then Polymestor, was imprisoned at Mycenae.  On Orestes' return, she recognized him at Agamemnon's tomb and played an active part in the assassination of Aegisthus and Clytemnestra. When the Erinyes pursued Orestes for this crime, she devoted herself to his welfare.  In Euripides' Orestes she fought at her brother's side against the local populace who wanted the murderers condemned to death.  Electra was the main character in Sophocles' (now lost) Aletes: when Orestes and Pylades went to Tauris, rumours started at Mycenae that they had died, and that Electra's sister Iphigenia had killed Orestes.  Aegisthus's son Aletes assumed the throne and Electra went to Delphi, where she met Iphigenia who had gone there with Orestes.  Electra was about to blind her when she saw her brother.  Electra and Orestes returned to Mycenae and killed Aletes.  Electra married Pylades and went with him to Phocis; their children were Medon (3) and Strophius.

Electracy

Actor Carmen Electra (stage name of Tara Leigh Patrick, b 1972) and Lindsay Lohan (b 1986), The Art of Elysium Launches Betty and Veronica Apparel Line in Association with Miramax Films and Archie Comics, Beverly Hills, California, May 2004.

Electracy is the “skill and facility necessary to exploit the potential of modern electronic media”, a idea that has come to attract more attention after the disclosures of AI (Artificial Intelligence) systems “going rogue”, something of interest not only because of the reported events but the suspicion there have likely been many more “undisclosed incidents”.  First appearing in Teletheory (1989), the concept of electracy was constructed by US literary theorist Professor Gregory Ulmer (b 1944, then holding the chair in the Department of English at the University of Florida and a professorship of Electronic Languages and Cybermedia at the European Graduate School in Saas-Fee, Switzerland) and it appeared at a time when the internet had expanded beyond the US.  What had come to be known as the internet (until circa 2016 often with an initial capital) had been restricted mostly to universities, the military and some government agencies but by the late 1980s it had extended to research institutions in the UK, Europe, Australia, New Zealand and Japan but looked nothing like whate the www (world wide web) would transform it to in the following decade.  According to Professor Ulmer, electracy was “to digital media what literacy is to print”, the concept encompassing the broader cultural, institutional, pedagogical, and ideological implications inherent in “…the major societal transition from print to electronic media”.  A portmanteau word, the construct was electr(icity) + trac(e) + -y with “trace” used in the sense made famous by French philosopher Jacques Derrida (1930-2004).  Trace was a core concept in Derridian deconstruction; it denoted the principle that every sign, word, or present experience carries within it the mark of what it is absent, not present, and different from itself.  Instead of meaning coming from a pure, self-contained origin or a direct connection to reality, the trace means that every “present meaning” is already inhabited by the “ghost” of other “past and future signs”.  Unlike some of the concepts from deconstruction and other forks of postmodernism, la trace could, at the definitional level, be understood by most.

Jung, Freud and the Electra complex

The pioneers of psychoanalysis gathered at Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts, September 1909. Front Row (left to Right): Sigmund Freud, Granville Stanley Hall (1844–1924) & Carl Jung.  Back Row (left to right): Sándor Ferenczi (1873–1933), Ernest Jones (1879–1958) & Abraham Arden Brill (1874–1948).

The group photograph was shot during a conference on psychology hosted by Dr Hall, then president of Clark University and the first in the US to earn a doctorate in the discipline.  Although even then psychoanalysis was established in the US, the conference would prove a landmark and trigger not only a wealth of publications but also the legitimization of the field to the extent departments of psychology began to proliferate in US institutions.  This was Freud's only trip to the US, a place where his influence would for generations be profound but, within half a decade, his estrangement from Jung had begun, producing the profession’s most famous schism that to some extent endures to this day.

Although in the public consciousness Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) does seem to loom over psychiatry and his theories continue to flavour the writing of at least some clinicians and academics, the editors of the APA's (American Psychiatric Association) DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) have moved on and in mainstream contemporary psychiatry, the Freudian “feminine Oedipus attitude” seems to be regarded primarily as a historical psychoanalytic concept rather than an acknowledged human developmental process or a psychiatric diagnosis.  It was Carl Jung (1875–1961) who coined the term “Electra complex” and explicitly Freud rejected it, not because he dismissed the notion but because his original conception was of his “Oedipus complex” as something applicable to both sexes and it was only later he constructed a more intricate model of female psychosexual development, thus the need for his term: “feminine Oedipus attitude”.

Electra Receiving the Ashes of her Brother, Orestes (circa 1927). oil on canvas by Jean-Baptiste Joseph Wicar (1762–1834), Worcester Art Museum, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA.

In Freud’s construct of female development: (1) the mother was the primary love object until (2) the child discovers the anatomical difference between the sexes, thus developing (3) what Freud styled “penis envy”, leading her to (4) blame her mother for rendering her with what she perceives as a “deficiency”, something that compelled her to (5) shift her affections towards her father meaning she (6) became her mother’s competitor for the father’s affection before (7) eventually identifying with her mother and accepting the defined “feminine role”.  Freud seems not to have commented on whether he was annoyed by Jung’s “Electra complex” becoming one of the most popular pieces of jargon to leak from the profession to popular discourse but he’d made clear his thoughts, writing in From the History of an Infantile Neurosis (the Wolfman case history) (1918) that he saw “no progress or advantage” in introducing the term and did not advocate its use.  That presumably was a clinician’s considered view though there’s no reason to suspect Austrian neurologists are any less prone than the rest of us to professional jealousy and in little more than a decade his position significantly had shifted; by 1931 Freud was arguing the pre-Oedipal attachment of girls to their mothers was much more important in than his earlier formulations had suggested.  So, although among Freudians, neo-Freudians and the wider community, his particular take on the Electra complex retains a following, the theory wasn’t a single, fixed proposition.

The Return of Orestes (from Electra by Sophocles) (1782), oil on canvas by John Downman (1749–1824), National Trust Collections, Hinton Ampner, Alresford.

The figure at the far left is Charles James Fox (1749–1806), a British Whig statesman whose career in politics endured for some four decades; he’s best remembered for his part in the Fox-North coalition government (April-December 1883 with Lord North (1732-1792)), dismissed by a then not quite mad George III (1738–1820; King of the UK 1760-1820) after the loss of the American colonies.  The episode was of note in the development of Westminster parliamentary conventions because the coalition had taken office despite the king’s opposition and when George III a few months later took the opportunity to “clear out that rotten crew”, it would be the last time the sovereign’s reserve powers would be invoked to sack a prime minister until in 1975 Sir John Kerr (1914–1991; Governor-General of Australia 1974-1977) sundered the commission of Gough Whitlam (1916–2014; Prime Minister of Australia 1972-1975), proving the royal prerogative still existed (although paradoxically perhaps now only in the hands of a monarch’s representative rather than their own).  There had been William IV’s (1765–1837; King of the UK 1830-1837) in 1834 dismissing Lord Melbourne (1779–1848; prime minister of the UK 1834 & 1835-1841) but historians seem to treat that more as a “gentlemen’s agreement” and most of those few Australians who by 1975 much thought about such things probably believed the days of meddling viceroys were done.

Fox’s other (and far-reaching) contribution to political evolution was that in refusing to serve in the administration of Lord Shelburne (1737-1805; Prime Minister of the UK 1782–1783), he accelerated the morphing of the Tory faction into a formalized party and no prime minister since Shelburne has attempted to govern without the support of a party.  In the literature, the relationship between George III and Fox often was described as “mutual antipathy” but “mutual hatred” better describes things and there have been few loathings so well documented as public knowledge, the king in a letter to North as early as 1775 saying of Fox he had: “…cast off every principle of common honour and honesty ... [a man who is] as contemptible as he is odious ... [and has an] aversion to all restraints.”  It was deeply personal view because the king attributed this dissolute lifestyle of his son and heir (George IV (1762–1830) King of the UK 1820-1830) to Fox’s corrosive influence.  Despite that, Fox’s appearance in the painting was likely playful rather than political, the artist often including public figures in his works with no overt purpose; Downman was not a “political artist”.

APA Dictionary of Psychology; the APA also publishes a concise edition.

Despite’s Freud’s place in the history of the profession and his continue presence within factions in mainstream psychiatric science, in the “standard” diagnostic literature (the DSM & the WHO's (World Health Organization’s) ICD (International Classification of Diseases)), there are only traces of his legacy.  The DSM-5-TR (2022) is the APA’s most comprehensive diagnostic classification system yet and it includes no mention of the Electra complex, feminine Oedipus complex, penis-envy syndrome, or Oedipal developmental stage, either as diagnoses or as elements in diagnostic criteria and that reflects the path of the modern (ie post 1980) DSM’s evolution as concepts not technically diagnoses came gradually to be removed or renamed, the framework shifting from the classic psychoanalytic explanations of psychopathology Freud, Jung and others had pioneered in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.  That doesn’t imply parent–child attachment, identification, rivalry and such has been downgraded in importance, indeed the volume of literature would suggest the opposite; it means just that modern developmental psychology studies these things extensively but generally without Freud's specific (and still famous) assumptions.  Less well-known than the DSM, the APA also publishes a psychology dictionary in which the Oedipus complex is discussed as a concept of classical psychoanalytic theory, noting that contemporary psychoanalytic thinking substantially has reduced its centrality and instead focuses more on empirical findings about earlier mother–child relationships.

Electra and the Chorus bearing vessels for libation on the tomb of Agamemnon (undated), illustration from The Choephori by Aeschylus (circa 525-circa 456 BC), pencil, pen and ink on paper by John Flaxman (1755–1826), an English sculptor and draughtsman in the neoclassical tradition, Royal Academy of Arts, London.

In modern parlance all that might suggest “Freud was cancelled by the DSM”.  That would be overstating things but it’s true than prior to the DSM-III (1980), the earlier editions (DSM-I (1952) & DSM-II (1968)) conceptualized mental disorders predominantly in psychodynamic terms with psychoanalytic concepts consequently afforded some prominence although despite the emphasis, neither the Oedipus or Electra complexes were ever listed in the DSM as a diagnosis; they were theoretical explanations of personality development and psychopathology rather than a disorder with diagnostic criteria.  It was in DSM-III the change really began, the editors deliberately moving psychiatric classification toward operationalized diagnostic criteria and away from competing psychodynamic theories, one consequence being explicit mention of the Oedipal theories disappeared from the DSM's diagnostic architecture; the threads could still be detected but that required prior knowledge, a not unreasonable assumption given the publication at the time tended circulate mostly within the profession; its high public profile would come later.  Psychoanalysis however has not disappeared and there are psychoanalytic theorists who continue to use Oedipal language meaning the concepts not infrequently appear in the literature although that does not imply modern psychiatry universally has empirically validated Freud's theory.

So if “Freud was cancelled” is the wrong phrase, it’s necessary to nominate one better and either “somewhat restricted” or “much diminished” better capture what happened (certainly if what’s being discussed is the DSM rather than psychiatry or psychotherapy as a whole).  Prior to the DSM-III, disorders commonly were described in terms of underlying psychological mechanisms and conflicts, emphasizing the primacy of psychoanalytic theory as an important influence in both DSM-I & DSM-II.  It was DSM-III that was the watershed in that it built the framework upon which all subsequent editions have been constructed, up to the current DSM-5-TR.  A major break from what had been established (reflecting a generational change in the profession), DSM-III introduced explicit operational diagnostic criteria and deliberately adopted an approach intended to be neutral concerning etiology (the establishment of a cause, origin, or reason for something).  Henceforth, the DSM would describe what a disorder looked like rather than discuss theories explaining why it manifested.

Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual, Third Edition (PDM-3, 2026).  The PDM is less popular with a general readership because it focuses on “why we’re mad” while the DSM defines exactly “how we’re mad” and offers hints on what to do about it.  The PDM is however useful for those who (in themselves or others) detect madness but wish to determine just when & why the instability began.

However, just because Freud's metapsychology ceased explicitly to appear in the DSM’s organizing framework doesn’t mean Freud has no influence on contemporary psychiatry; a number of the concepts he developed or modified have, to varying degrees, survived including unconscious processes; defense mechanisms; transference and countertransference; the importance of early relationships; attachment and interpersonal development and (vitally) the idea that psychological processes can operate outside conscious awareness.  As that implies, much modern work has been built Freudian concepts that became mainstream orthodoxy.  What happened was those concepts have been reformulated or interpolated into broader psychological theories, rather than being accepted simply because Freud proposed them and, in a nod to Freud’s seminal role, there is now the PDM (Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual, first published in 2006 and now in its third edition (2026)) which, able to be read as a complement to the DSM or a stand-alone title, deliberately incorporates psychodynamic concepts.  That the DSM & PDM peacefully can co-exist does indicate why it’s at least misleading to speak of Freud being “cancelled”; it was more that the DSM was becoming a different sort of publication and Freud needed a new home.

Buick Electra

1973 Buick Electra 225 Custom Four-door Hardtop.

Richard Nixon's (1913-1994; VPOTUS 1953-1961 and POTUS 1969-1974) last full-year in office, 1973 was the last “good year” of the old US economy but events in the Middle East that October would trigger the first oil shock and legislation would impose on cars battering-ram like bumpers and crude emission control devices that impaired driveability reduced power and increased fuel consumption.  It’s remarkable behemoths like the Electra lasted another three seasons.

Over six generations, GM’s (General Motors) Buick division produced the Electra between 1959 and 1990.  For its whole existence the Electra was the flagship of division’s full-size line and, at various points, was available with just about every style of coachwork Detroit offered in the era including two & four-door hardtops, four door sedans, two door convertibles and five door station wagons.  While there were no four-door convertibles, or station wagons with two-doors or in hardtop configuration, some coach-builders used also the platform as the basis of ambulances, limousines or hearses.  The best-known of the breed was the Electra 225 that gained its name from being an impressive 225 inches (5.715 m) in length and while dimensions continue commonly to be used as product descriptions in many industries, explicit mention of length does seem rare in cars although allusions were once common (SWB, LWB, EWB, an appended “L” etc). The Maybach revival used “57” (5.7 m long) & “62” (6.2 m) and some of the Land Rovers were designated according to the wheelbase in inches (88, 110 etc); there was the Ford GT40 but that was about height.  The classic Electra 225s (they wouldn’t always measure 225 inches stem to stern but the name stuck) were built on the GM corporate C platform and although part of the “great down-sizing” in 1977, it retained the RWD (rear-wheel-drive) configuration until 1985 when, along with the equivalent ranges built by Cadillac, Oldsmobile, Pontiac & Chevrolet, the “full-size” lines shifted to FWD (front-wheel-drive).  The most famous Electra 225 was a 1966 four-door hardtop in which the actor Jayne Mansfield (1933–1967) was killed after the car slammed into the back of a stationary truck;  the protective “Mansfield bars” on trucks are named after her.  Because of the name, it was used for the Buick Electra E5, a battery electric mid-size crossover SUV manufactured since 2023 in China by SAIC-GM under the Buick brand.

Powered clamshell tailgate on 1971 Buick Estate Wagon.  The 1971 Estate used the Electra platform and was Buick's first full-sized station wagon since 1953.  It was a very cool feature.  

A footnote in the Electra’s history is the powered clamshell tailgate used on the Estate Wagon between 1971 and 1976.  Built on a 127 inch (3.23 m) wheelbase, the Estate Wagons truly were large machines and the clamshell tailgate appeared on all GM’s big wagons in the era, the novelties being the powered rear glass sliding up into the roof as the tailgate slid into a recess under the cargo floor; very cool.  The power tailgate (the first ever seen on station wagons) was operated by switches on the instrument panel or a key switch on the rear quarter panel but while wagons had the powered glass, the powered tailgate was optional and, if the manual version, there was a small handle on the tailgate and an additional chrome “ring” with “flippers” around the keyhole.  The apparatus operated by turning the key to raise the glass into the roof cavity with the tailgate lowered by turning the chrome ring.  A clever design of the type engineers really would have enjoyed perfecting, the tailgate used counter-weights of sizes & springs of tension (a la garage doors) calculated exactly to allow the structure to drop under the force of gravity while demanding only a light action manually to raise it; it was a case-study in the difference between mass & weight (mass x gravity).  Although heavy and intricate, the system proved admirably reliable but the design wasn’t carried over to the new generation of smaller station wagons because, in the unforgiving new world, there was a quest to reduce weight in the hunt for improved fuel economy and lower exhaust emissions.

Lockheed Electra

TEAL Lockheed L-188 Electra ZK-TEB 1963 (left) & 1965 (right).  The TEAL livery was retained when the corporate name was changed in 1965, the aircraft not immediately re-painted, “Air New Zealand” replacing “TEAL JET PROP” on the fuselage as required by the rules of the Convention on International Civil Aviation (better known as the “Chicago Convention” (1944).

The airline TEAL (Tasman Empire Airways Limited) emerged from the Tasman Sea Agreement, an intergovernmental treaty between the Australia, New Zealand and the UK, concluded in London early in 1940.  The purpose of the operation was to provide for the trans-Tasman traffic of passengers, cargo and mail, something disrupted by the outbreak of World War II (1939-1945).  In the manner of a number of wartime agreements, the treaty contained a sunset clause stipulating a termination within three months of the end of the war with Germany but such was the state of post-war civil aviation that arrangements were carried over, the pre-war practices not returning to the trans-Tasman route until 1954.  As part of that re-organization, the shareholdings, previously spread between the New Zealand Government (20%), Union Airways (19%), BOAC (38%) and Qantas (23%), were dissolved and the two governments assumed co-ownership until 1961 when both decided to maintain separate national carriers, TEAL and Qantas, the relationship having been strained since the Australians had insisted TEAL order the turboprop Lockheed Electra to maintain fleet standardization with Qantas while the New Zealanders wanted to upgrade to jets.  In 1965, TEAL was re-named Air New Zealand.

Two Lockheed P-3 Orions of the Japanese SDF (Self-Defense Force), on anti-submarine patrol over the Sea of Japan.

The naming of the sea is contested.  Japan asserts “Sea of Japan” has since the early 1800s been the internationally accepted term while the RoK (Republic of Korea (South Korea)) claims “East Sea” predates the period of Japanese colonial rule and the DPRK (Democratic Republic of Korea (North Korea)) Korea advocates use of “East Sea of Korea”.  Unlike the Electra L-188 on which it was based, the Orion proved a great commercial success and between 1960-1990 over 750 were built, the aircraft adopted by over 20 countries; some remain in service.  The distinctive “tail “stinger” is a “MAD boom”, used for the magnetic anomaly detection (MAD) of submarines.

Re-cycling a name the company had in the 1930s used for a smaller airliner, US manufacturer Lockheed between 1957-1961 built 170 Electra L-188s, the first large turboprop airliner built in the US.  With a number of unique design features that made it suitable for use on short runways or airfields located at high altitudes, there should have been great scope for international sales but a combination of two well-publicized crashes (caused by a design fault in the engine-mounts) and the new generation of jet aircraft suppressed demand meaning production ended a decade earlier than planned.  Ironically, whether in passenger service or as the freighters many were later converted into, the Electra proved robust, reliable and provided stellar service to many operators as late as the 1990s, the airframe also serving as the basis for the Lockheed P-3 Orion maritime patrol aircraft that saw service with many nations.  The Electra’s darkest chapter was that a flight of three was purchased by the military junta that between 1976-1983 ruled Argentina and, during the “Dirty War” (1974-1973) the three flew missions to dump some of the detenidos-desaparecidos (detained-disappeared), political opponents of the regime, of which there may have been as many as 25,000) into the South Atlantic Ocean.  The Argentine Navy’s Electra’s proved ideal for the gruesome task because they were configured with wide cargo doors.

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 Director 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.