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.      

Pheasant

Pheasant (pronounced fez-uhnt)

(1) Any of various long-tailed gallinaceous birds of the family Phasianidae, especially Phasianus colchicus (ring-necked pheasant), having a brightly-coloured plumage in the male: native to Asia but now widely dispersed.

(2) Any of various other gallinaceous birds of the family Phasianidae, including the quails and partridges

(3) Any of several other gallinaceous birds, especially the ruffed grouse.

(4) The meat of such a bird, served as food.

1250–1300: From the Middle English fesaunt & fesant, from the Anglo-French fesaunt, from the Old French fesan, from the Latin phāsiānus, from the Ancient Greek φᾱσιανός (phāsiānós órnis) (Phasian bird; bird of the river Φᾶσις (Phâsis (in Colchis in the Caucauses were the birds existed in prolific number)), named after the River Phasis, in which flows into the Black Sea at Colchis in the Caucauses.  It replaced the native Old English wōrhana, a variant of mōrhana.  The ph- from the Greek was restored in English by the late fourteenth century while the wholly unetymological -t exists because of confusion with –ant (a suffix of nouns, formed from present participle of verbs in first Latin conjugation (ancient, pageant, tyrant, peasant; also talaunt, a former Middle English variant of talon, etc.).  The Latin was the source also of the Spanish faisan, the Portuguese feisão, the German Fasan and the Russian bazhantu; the Welsh was ffesant and the Cornish fesont.  In England, Pheasant was used as surname from the mid-twelfth century (and assumed occupational (pheasant farmer)).  The form in the Medieval Latin was fasianus.  A pheasantry is a place for keeping and rearing pheasants and the most common collective noun for a group of pheasants is bevy (less commonly a bouquet (when flushed), or nye.  Pheasant & pheasantry are nouns, pheasantless & pheasantlike are adjectives; the noun plural is pheasants.

Flawless food's oven roasted pheasant with herb butter.

Ingredients:

1 x 700 gram pheasant

30 grams of butter

1 teaspoon of garlic puree

1 teaspoon of Dried Thyme

Salt & Pepper

1 small Onion (red, brown or white)

1 small apple or citrus fruit (optional in lieu of onion)

6 Stuffing balls (optional)

Preparation:

Remove pheasant and butter from refrigerator approximately 40 minutes before cooking (allows butter to soften and pheasant to attain room temperature).

Preheat oven to 210℃ (fan) / 230℃ conventional.

Pat dry pheasant using paper towel.

Place softened butter, garlic puree and dried thyme; mash together with fork.

Rub garlic and herb butter blend all over pheasant including inside body cavity.

Chop onion in half and place inside the body cavity (the fruit can be used for a slightly sweeter effect (the placement is mainly to keep the flesh moist).

Generously season pheasant with salt & pepper, the place in oven roasting tray.

Roasting process:

Start cooking at the preheated temperature.

After ten (10) minutes cooking, lower heat to 180℃ (fan) / 200℃ (conventional) and cook for a further 40-50 minutes.  Note the timings are based on a 700 gram pheasant; a larger bird may need to be roasted for another 10-15 minutes.  If using a meat thermometer, internal temperature of pheasant should reach 64°C at the thickest part of the breast and thigh should reach 74 °C.

Add 6 Stuffing Balls to the tray if using, timing them according to their supplied instructions.

Serving:

Remove pheasant from oven, cover loosely with foil and allow it to rest for 20–30 minutes.  Skin should be a golden-brown.

Carve pheasant by cutting through both the legs, then slice down either side of the breastbone (first removing wishbone first will make that easier).

Serve as desired but traditional accompaniments include roast potatoes, broccoli, carrots, Brussels sprouts, honey roast parsnips, stuffing balls and gravy.

The golden pheasants

Chrysolophus pictus (the golden pheasant or Chinese pheasant).

There are more than two dozen taxonomic species within the family Phasianidae (pheasants), one of which is the golden pheasant (Chrysolophus pictus, known also as the “Chinese pheasant”), a game bird native to the forests of mountainous areas of western China.  The plumage of the males is famously vibrant which makes it a favorite among bird watchers and photographers while the female is a duller-mottled brown plumage, something common among many avian species including the peacock (male) & peahen (female), the evolutionary advantage for the females being the fine camouflage it afforded against the forest floor.

Nazi Kreisleiter (District Leader) standard four pocket open collar tunic (circa 1940).  The party’s regulations about uniforms first appeared in 1920 and the details were often revised until things were standardized in 1939.

In the Third Reich (1933-1945) the term Goldfasane (golden pheasants) was a derisive nickname used of high-ranking members of the Nazi Party (and their wives), the name an allusion to (1) the golden hue of the fabric of the party uniform, (2) their tendency to appear well fed (al la a plump pheasant fattened for slaughter) at a time when much of the population was living under food rationing and (3) their ostentation and self-importance (likened to a colorful and strutting pheasant).  That brown became the "official" color of the party  wasn't a kind of proto-1970s fashion choice.  When Germany lost its African and tropical Pacific colonies after World War I (1914-1948), a huge stock of khaki uniforms and other kit became available as "army-surplus" and these the party purchased at low cost.  As time progressed and the uniforms came to be tailored, as a general principle, the more exalted the office, the more golden the shade of fabric used for the garb.  Even the party headquarters in Munich became known as the Braunes Haus (Brown House) and the symbolism of its destruction in 1943 by Allied bombing wasn't lost on the local population although the British, even then sensitive to criticism of "area bombing" of civilian targets, made little attempt to exploit the success for propaganda purposes.  On the site of the long-demolished Braunes Haus, the Bavarian government in 2015 opened the NS-Dokumentationszentrum (NSDOKU, the Munich Documentation Centre for the History of National Socialism), a  museum with a focus on the history and consequences of the National Socialist (Nazi) regime and the role of Munich as its Hauptstadt der Bewegung (capital of the movement).  

Portrait of Auguste Escoffier (1846–1935).

The decoration is the Ordre national de la Légion d'honneur (National Order of the Legion of Honour, France’s highest order of merit, awarded to both civilians and the military.  It was established in 1802 by Napoleon Bonaparte (1769–1821; leader of the French Republic 1799-1804 & Emperor of the French from 1804-1814 & 1815)).  In the internal logic of French culture it was a wholly appropriate honor for a chef though to the south not all would have approved: Benito Mussolini (1883-1945; Duce (leader) & Prime-Minister of Italy 1922-1943) had expressed his disgust at the decadence of the modern Italian people, believing they had been seduced by French ways into “elevating cooking to the status of high art”, declaring he would never allow Italy to descend to the level of France, a country ruined by “alcohol, syphilis and journalism”.

The Brigade de cuisine (kitchen brigade) was a hierarchical organizational chart for commercial kitchens, codified from earlier practices by French chef, Georges-Auguste Escoffier who, following service in the French army, had refined and codified the the kitchen structure first documented in the fourteenth century.  The military-type chain-of-command became formalized but what was novel was what he dubbed the chef de partie system, an organizational model based on sections which were both geographically and functionally defined.  His design was intended to avoid duplication of effort and facilitate communication.  The economic realities of technological innovation, out-sourcing to external supply chains and the changing ratio of labour costs to revenue have meant even the largest modern kitchens now use a truncated version of the Escoffien system although the sectional chef de partie structure remains.  In the pre-modern era, Escoffier’s idealized structure was adopted only in the largest of exclusive establishments or the grandest of cruise liners and, like the Edwardian household, is a footnote in sociological, organizational and economic history.  In the late 1870s, after army service of some seven years, Monsieur Escoffier opened his own restaurant in Cannes.  It was called Le Faisan d'Or (The Golden Pheasant).

Kiji-shō (きじ章; Order of the Golden Pheasant).

There is also the Golden Pheasant Award (きじ章 (kiji-shō) or 金鳳賞 (Kinpōshō)), the highest award for adult leaders in the Scout Association of Japan and although it was first conferred in 1952, there’s no record of whether the earlier sardonic German slang was discussed when deciding on a name.  Officially awarded by the Chief Scout of Japan, recipients are chosen by a selection committee (an institution at which the Japanese excel) on the basis of their eminent achievement and meritorious service to the Association for a period of at least twenty years.  Most awards have been granted to Japanese citizens but the distinction may be granted to any member of a scout association affiliated with the WOSM (World Organization of the Scout Movement).  The (avian) golden pheasant has symbolic significance in Japanese culture where pheasants (particularly the green pheasant (Phasianus versicolor), Japan's national bird) have been revered for their grace and connection to nature; they convey an aura of prestige and distinction due to the majestic appearance.  The award consists of a medallion depicting a stylized golden pheasant, suspended from a white ribbon with two red stripes, worn around the neck.  The attendant uniform ribbon (worn above the left breast pocket), consists of two red stripes on a white background with a 5 mm golden device of the Japanese scout emblem.

Girl Scout icon Lindsay Lohan wearing an honorary Order of the Golden Pheasant.  (Digitally altered image from Flaunt Issue 195, November 2024, original photograph by the Morelli Brothers).

It is of course a great honor to join the exclusive club of those with a Golden Pheasant but the evidence does suggest it’s something of a kiss of political death for those statesmen (Golden Pheasants a male thing) so dubbed, their careers ending often not well.  Richard Nixon (1913-1994; VPOTUS 1953-1961 and POTUS 1969-1974) was awarded his in 1953 during a visit to Japan while VPOTUS, the brief ceremony conducted in Tokyo after his luncheon address to the America-Japan Society.  In 1974, Mr Nixon was forced to resign the presidency after revelations of his conduct during the Watergate Scandal.

Mohammed Reza Pahlavi (1919–1980; the last Shah of Iran 1941-1979) gained his Golden Pheasant in 1957.  In 1979 he was overthrown in the revolution which brought to power Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (1900-1989; Supreme Leader, Islamic Republic of Iran, 1979-1989) and the establishment of the Islamic Republic.  Also honored in the same year was Sir Walter Nash (1882–1968; prime-minister of New Zealand 1957-1960); he lost the 1960 general election and never regained power.  A royal recipient was Constantine II (1940–2023; the last King of Greece 1964-1973) who was honored upon assuming the throne in 1964.  Constantine was forced into exile after a military putsch in 1967 (the so-called “Colonels' Coup”) with the monarchy abolished in 1973, something confirmed by two subsequent referenda (1973 & 1974).

Golden Pheasant aspirant: A Japanese scout pack leader (left) with his pack of cub scouts, circa 1964.

Gerald Ford (1913–2006; VPOTUS 1973-1974 and POTUS 1974-1977) was in 1974 created a Golden Pheasant (while VPOTUS) and he went on to lose the 1976 presidential election.  He did however have the satisfaction of knowing not only did the man who beat him (Jimmy Carter (1924-2024; POTUS 1977-1981)) never become a Golden Pheasant, but also turned out to be “a bit of a turkey”.  Paras Bir Bikram Shahdev (b 1971; last Crown Prince of Nepal, heir apparent to the throne 2001-2008) became a Golden Pheasant in 2005.  In 2001, there was what is a now uncommon act of regicide known as the Durbar Hatyakanda (Nepalese royal massacre) that was actually a family squabble, the assassin of nine members of the dynasty (including the king & queen) being Crown Prince Dipendra (1971-2001) who, by virtue of the constitutional arrangements, for three days reigned while in a coma before succumbing to a self-inflicted gunshot wound.  Subsequently, there was a peaceful transition to a republic and in 2008 the world’s last Hindu monarchy was abolished.  Ronald Reagan (1911-2004; POTUS 1981-1989) was the last POTUS to become a recipient and his second term was tainted by Iran-Contragate affair.  Given the history, it may be the US State Department has instructed the ambassador to Tokyo quietly to inform the chief scout POTUSs would prefer not to become Golden Pheasants but a gift like a ceremonial woggle warmly would be received.

Mori san explains.

Yoshirō Mori san OGP (centre) meeting the official mascots (boy in blue, girl in pink) for the Tokyo 2020 Olympics and Paralympics, Tokyo, 2018.  While serving as president of the Tokyo 2020 organizing committee, an international human rights advocacy group awarded him a “gold medal” for sexism after he complained women members of the committee “...talked too much” due to their “strong sense of rivalry. If one says something, they all end up saying something.”  

Beating the drum: Sanae Takaichi san with drum kit.  In the Japan of 2026, a woman can become prime minister but can neither reign as empress nor receive an Order of the Golden Pheasant.

As Mori san's LDP (Liberal Democratic Party) colleagues know, women have little to say worth hearing but so depleted are the party's stocks of estimable men, in 2025 they had to endure the humiliation of Sanae Takaichi san (b 1961) taking the party presidency and thus becoming the nation's first female prime minister.  To add insult to injury, in 2026 she called an election and won a landslide victory, giving the LDP its highest ever count of seats in the Diet's lower house, meaning attention now turns to the next upper house election, pencilled in for mid-2028.  Upper house elections are no longer the sleepy non-news events of old because if Takaichi san can emulate her electorate success and deliver the LDP a companion two-thirds majority, the path to change the constitution is opened, something that will with great interest be watched from Beijing and the White House, both places with opinions on anything that might permit the JSDF (Japan Self Defence Forces, on paper a potent military force) to become more "adventurous".  With Takaichi san's victories, the LDP men know they have lost face but in July 2026 they had the satisfaction of succeeding in their conspiracy with the mandarins of the Imperial Household (of which the LDP is a kind of branch office) to ensure it remains impossible for a woman to sit on the Emperor's throne, a thought as much an affront to them as would be a female pope to the Roman Curia.  

Yoshirō Mori (森 喜朗, Mori Yoshirō san, b 1937; prime minister of Japan 2000-2001) actually anticipated the “curse of the Golden Pheasant”, leaving office after a gaff-prone two year term some time before he gained the award in 2003.  Mori san was notable for his consistently low approval ratings while prime-minister and most public opinion polls towards the end of his tenure hovered between 7-12% of Japanese voters having a positive view of his premiership.  Mori san had however been a fly-half (first five-eighth in New Zealand's quirky naming system) when playing for the prestigious Waseda University rugby team so for a while he just put his head down and ploughed-on.  That lasted until shortly after the publication of one poll reporting he had received a zero (0%) rating, believed to be the lowest suffered by any politician since polling became (more-or-less) scientific in the 1940s.  At breakfast, it can’t have been much fun for Mori san; he’d have just started to enjoy his gohan (steamed rice), misoshiru (miso soup) yakizakana (grilled fish), tsukemono (pickled vegetables), tamagoyaki (rolled omelette) and ryokucha (green tea), only to open the morning paper and find out nobody in the country liked him.  Shortly after that, he advised his LDP colleagues he would soon resign and they should conclude the (already well-advanced) plotting and scheming to find his successor.  Still, as a consolation, Mori san has his Golden Pheasant.

Pheasant wars: A golden pheasant and a Lady Amherst's pheasant contesting occupancy of a rock.

Pheasant Plucking

The pheasant features in a favorite schoolboy rhyme, said to have origins in an eighteenth century English village where it was composed by Elias, a wandering bard performing at one of the hamlet's “grand pheasant festivals”; he’d been much impressed by the efficient and rhythmic plucking of pheasants by champion pheasant plucker Tom Fletcher.  Whether or not that story is true isn’t known but it (and other variations) is a common tale.  In its modern form the tongue-twister appears usually as:

I'm not the pheasant plucker,
I'm only the pheasant plucker's son,
But I'll keep on plucking pheasants
'Till the pheasant plucker comes.

The verse was soon as much a part of the festivals as the pheasant plucking proper and was popular drinking game, those making a mistake during a recital having to drink a pint of ale before having another attempt.  The extended version read:

I'm not a pheasant plucker,
I'm a pheasant plucker's mate,
And I'm only plucking pheasants
'cause the pheasant plucker's late.
 
Plucking pheasants is a pleasure
when the pheasant plucker's near,
But when pheasants pluck at pheasants,
then the plucking's rather queer.
 
So, if I'm plucking pheasants,
where the pleasant pheasants roam,
I'll pluck enough for supper
till the pheasant plucker's home.
 
And when the pheasant plucker comes,
we'll pluck them side by side,
Through pleasant plains and pheasant fields
where pheasants love to hide.