20061109 - Clint's cube at work - 108-0839 - main view 2

20061109 - Clint's cube at work - 108-0839 - main view 2

Image by Rev. Xanatos Satanicos Bombasticos (ClintJCL)
Here was my cubicle at USPIS, before I was moved to Potomac. Yes, I keep a weird cube.

The Allsteel #19 chair is 0 (I consulted a dealer when it was taken away from me for awhile. Chrome finish is 0 extra and I honestly considered it out of spite.)

I really wish I hadn't let them talk me out of giving up the box when I moved, because it was the perfect height for my arm. Nowadays, I use no mousepad. I use my leg. I drop my mouse many times every day. With my back problems, I simply cannot, as a habit, reach.

Anyway: Many notes added, describing parts of the picture. Mouse over the picture to see them.

Allsteel #19 chair, BARF detergent, Furby toy, Pirates Of Darkwater toy, PowerPuff Girls toy, binder clip, computer, cubicle, monitor, water filter.

Clint's cubicle, USPIS, Arlington, Virginia.

November 9, 2006.


... Read my blog at http://ClintJCL.wordpress.com.

They Might Be Giants, kids show, Regent Theatre, Arlington MA, 23 May 2010

Image by Chris Devers
This photo was used by BrooklynBased on Nobody’s Business But the Turks, a piece about a free show TMBG did on the Williamsburg Waterfront in July 2011. Sadly, their site doesn't seem to keep the photos that were used at the time, but I promise it had been there...

• • • • •

Via the Regent Theatre's web site:

A Special Family Show with . . .

They Might Be Giants
Benefit Concerts for Boston By Foot
Sunday, May 23 at 12pm and 3pm
Both shows sold out - thank you!

They Might Be Giants will be performing two special shows especially for families. These are full band, full length performances. Both shows are to benefit Boston By Foot, the non-profit group giving guided walking tours of Boston for over 33 years. All concert goers can also use their ticket stub to get a free tour from Boston by Foot, including Boston by Little Feet tours for kids, during the upcoming season. All profits will go to BBF. www.bostonbyfoot.org/

They Might Be Giants Biography
HERE COMES SCIENCE!

For alternative rock legends They Might Be Giants, rave reviews from the likes of Time Magazine, Rolling Stone, The Village Voice, Pitchfork, NPR and beyond might not be that unexpected, but we're not talking about their regular gig here. Sure, TMBG have sold millions of records, are multi-Grammy winners and have even composed a musical accompaniment for an entire issue of McSweeney's, but these most recent accolades are for the work TMBG has created for children and--as the reviews attest--no other band swings as effortlessly from adult music to children’s fare and back again with the artistic and commercial success of They Might Be Giants.

John Flansburgh and John Linnell's latest CD/DVD is Here Comes Science (Idlewild/Disney Sound). It's an ultra-vivid crash course through topics that in lesser hands could easily put kids to sleep. With rock anthems and electronic goodies crafted to amuse, intrigue and deliver the 4-1-1 on evolution, solar system, photosynthesis, the scientific method and more. Following Here Comes the ABCs and Here Come the 123s, Science is geared for older kids and it introduces ideas in a way that not only inform but will stay in your head forever.

While it may seem like an odd move for a duo recognized as the progenitors of the American alternative rock movement, it really all makes perfect sense. From their earliest days with Dial-A-Song through their online music distribution, TMBG have always challenged rock's status quo and gone out of their way to take their music to brand new audiences, and by the looks of things, they’re having a lot of fun doing it their way. The Giants use every bit of fan interactive technology by connecting with kids via regular podcasts and including a DVD of delightful animated interpretations of their songs with each Here Comes... album.

The band is constantly working on new music, new projects and touring--sometimes with 2 shows a day. Founders John Flansburgh and John Linnell, along with their long standing live combo of Dan Miller, Danny Weinkauf and Marty Beller, show no signs of swapping one successful gig (adult music) for another (children’s music). Rejoice people of Earth--there’s just that much more for us all to enjoy.

Question: You once said in an interview that TMBGs knew what you didn’t want to do with your music geared for kids: You didn’t want to tell them how to behave or write songs that are educational. But these songs are quite educational, and in fact, you have a science consultant on this record. Did you make a conscious decision to really teach something on Here Comes Science?

John Linnell: I think it’s still a record you can listen to for enjoyment, and that’s real important to us. I am perfectly comfortable with the idea of something that is pure entertainment, but I don’t think there is any need for something just purely educational from us. My sense of this record is that it is mostly fun, musical and interesting and it happens to have lyrics that talk about science.

Question: Did any Children’s books or albums make an impression on you when you were a child? Because now you’re making that impression on children.

John Flansburgh: We get that question a lot, and it’s a valid question, but speaking for myself, I feel like we have something to contribute to kid's music because what we're doing is actually lacking in the general culture. Generally, our stuff is not really coming out of any amazing experience with the kid's stuff from the past. Our childhood was during the really golden era of classic pop and singles. Those songs weren't really designed for kids, but the power of it spoke to us and a lot of other kids quite directly.

Curiously--although I see the obvious connections--we didn’t really grow up with all of the progressive kids stuff of the 70's. We were that micro generation of glitter-rock young teens listening to Alice Cooper and David Bowie and we totally missed the boat on Sesame Street and School House Rock and Free To Be You and Me. But even being a bit too old for it, you could tell there was something cool about that stuff. Basically the cartoons of our generation were either super-violent, like Spiderman, or the really simple-minded Hanna-Barbera cartoons.

Question: Which one of you was the science student? Either or you? Neither of you?

J. Linnell: Specifically into science? I would say we were both middling students in school, but philosophically we are both, as adults, very pro-science. We like living in the post-enlightenment era in history. Are we still living in the enlightenment or is it over now, I can’t tell? Are we in the “en-darkenment” now?

J. Flansburgh: I think we’re actually in to the “gee whiz” part of science--all the scientific phenomenon that sparks your imagination. We certainly aren't academics, but there is something remarkable about the world of science and there are ideas in science that just send your mind reeling.

J. Linnell: One the things that is exciting about it is that it makes you realize that things that are true, that can be proven, aren’t always intuitive. There is a difference between what seems to be the case and what turns out to be proven to be the case, and that’s really exciting. The world isn’t always what it seems to be and it makes everything more wonderful in a way. You have an experience of the world, walking around, and then science provides knowledge about the world that is not always anything like the experience.

The history of scientific discovery is partly revealing things that you don’t always experience directly, it’s bizarre in a way that so much of what we know is stuff we can’t always experience directly, like molecules and galaxies.

Question: Does that make it easier or harder to write about Science?

J. Linnell: Well, both. There is a point that you do reflect that you’re trying to explain something preposterous. And luckily, I think kids know the whole world is strange and preposterous, but as they get older, they get used to the idea that there are facts they just have to take someone’s word for.

Question: Considering you guys once used an answering machine to showcase your material, how amazed are you that you have all of this media at your disposal – podcasts, internet, video, etc…how has it changed the way you work?

J. Flansburgh: We enjoyed having an easy-breezy, loose reputation in terms of getting our music out to people. It was very great to be the one of the few acts in the United States who wasn’t preoccupied with getting on the radio or a cash return on our music. Of course now there is almost no end to the free stuff, and it is cool to see how much you can get in to the world, but with the most popular videos on YouTube being cats jumping into a box or people getting pushed down escalators, part of me worries that all this electronic media is just in the service of turning our culture into an endless episode of America’s Funniest Home Videos.

J. Linnell: A lot of what the technology suggests to people is the democratizing of culture and the notion of interactivity kind of caught fire online early on. What’s weird for John and I is that we were never interested in either one of those things. We actually like the idea of controlling what we are doing and we like the old fashioned idea of there being quality control on culture, that you would get the “good stuff” and there would be a way, through a critical apparatus or institutions, that would deliver the good stuff and filter out the bad stuff. It feels like the big problem nowadays is that everything should be available to everyone at all times and the result is a lot of garbage to wade through…not to sound like an 80 year old man! (laughs)

Question: With your accompanying DVD, how did the directors and animators come together? Are they the same people from Here Come the 123s? How much creative control do you give the animators with your songs?

J. Flansburgh: We are the producers on all the animated material and we select the artists we collaborate with pretty carefully. We've been involved in a lot of television and video projects over the years and that was very good training for these projects. There is an expression in rock video production: “Good. Fast. Cheap. Choose two” It’s a very unreasonable thing to expect everything to come together on a tight budget. Our strategy is to give the animators a relatively long lead time so they can do something that will be a good portfolio piece for them and something cool for us. And although we’re on a tight budget, we can offer a large amount of artistic freedom, and that gives us the opportunity to work with the most creative people out there.

Question: For this tour, you’re doing both “kid” and “adult” shows, sometimes 2 in one day. How is it different when you perform in front of kids versus when you perform in front of adults?

J. Flansburgh: Whatever pretensions you might have about your performance get totally re-calibrated when you’re playing for kids–playing a kid show is probably a bit closer to being a school teacher than being a rock star. There are also a lot of parents in the audience and we address them as well which kind of breaks forth the wall of "kiddie-ness."

Just to address the questions we always get: “how is it different writing a song for kids or writing for adults?” or “performing for kids and performing for adults?” Well, there is a real overlap, but there are meaningful differences too. A good song works in a way that is kind of irreducible whether or not it’s for kids or adults. If a song has a strong melody or an interesting concept, it will animate any audience, but in performance, kids have a really short attention span, so keeping things moving is important. Routinely the confetti machine gets the biggest response of the day. That will keep your ego in check.

Although in the past, “Clap your Hands” and "Alphabet of Nations" worked for adults, by and large the kid stuff stayed in the kid show just because it's, well, for kids! (laughs). But with "Here Comes Science" a lot of the songs work good in the adult show. and that’s unusual. “Meet the Elements,” “My Brother the Ape,” “A Shooting Star is not a Star,” and “Why Does the Sun Shine” slid into the adult show without any second thoughts, and “I Am a Paleontologist” is totally rocking live.

Question: What’s next for They Might Be Giants?

J. Flansburgh: We’re working on a rock album right now, but we have so much touring interrupting our effort it's hard to know when it will get done, so the real answer is we're going to be spending a lot of time on a tour bus trying to figure out how to get the WiFi working!

Our children’s book collaboration with Pascal Campion, Kids Go, just came out at the end of last year on Simon & Schuster. It's actually a very beautiful project and a fulfillment of a dream of mine. When we were approached, I wanted to do an actual picture book, which very few people get to do, and it was exciting to realize that dream. A good picture book is something that really stays with you.

[365 Toy Project: 029/365] Batman: Scarlet Part 11

Image by nhussein
"Chase after the truth like all hell and you'll free yourself, even though you never touch its coat-tails." -- Clarence S. Darrow

Barbara Gordon's Journal, April 11th 2019.

Today was spent waiting in anticipation for a message from Batman. I was almost about to turn in for the day when at 11:50pm, I got a video call from him on my laptop. I clicked on "accept" and attached my webcam. A video call window appeared on my laptop, and I could see the Batman. He was inside his car, and there were numerous little dials and switches all around the driver's compartment. It looked more like an airplane cockpit than an automobile.

"Greetings Oracle," said the masked man in the video screen. "Thank you for the information. I have patrolled this route all night, and 1 minute ago I picked up the green Renault. She's making a run for it, so I am in hot pursuit. I need you to contact Ellen Yin and keep her posted. If you use the phone, you can route the phone cable through the black box I gave you to mask your identity and location. I have a microcamera attached to my suit and also in front of my car. I will switch to the car camera now. You will be able to watch the chase."

Batman flicked a switch, and the video window switched to show the read ahead. Along with the video feed, there was additional data in the transmission that was automatically picked up by my online map program; it was coordinates of Batman's current location.

In the video window, I saw a green car speeding wildly down the street in front of Batman's car. However, Batman was catching up very quickly. I doubt a 25 year old Renault could outrun the Batmobile.

The Renault entered a tunnel, and Batman was close behind. The green car turned right when it exited the tunnel. Batman flicked another switch and something shiny darted out from the Batmobile towards the green car he was in pursuit of. There was a loud bang, and the green car went out of control. It spun wildly on the road until it crashed a lamp post. As Batman slowed down his car to stop, a figure crawled out of the wreckage and ran off into a nearby alley.

Tha Batmobile stopped. The top roof slid open.

"I am turning off the camera on the car. I am going on foot from here. Wait a few minutes and you should get a camera feed from me," came Batman's voice through my headphones.

Then the car video feed went dark.

I started dialling Ellen Yin's cellphone number.

_______
This picture is part of an ongoing story. I sold out and went all Hollywood. I worked in a car chase. I know there is no such thing in the original story I have hopelessly deviated from, but I guess it was inspired by the part where Holmes stows on board the cab. The Batmobile you see here is a toy from The Batman cartoon series. I couldn't use the Tumbler, because it had been destroyed in The Dark Knight. So the cartoon car stands in for a hypothetical future Batmobile (and it doesn't look half bad, actually).

You can see a bit of Harley Quinn in the green car, and she's played by Sakurawind, who graciously offered to act for me. I cannot thank you enough.

The picture uses great malborough street by mikecolvin82 for the street and tunnel, which is CC-licensed. Thanks!

Provided attribution is given, I agree to give Kyle Wendling a non-exclusive, transferable, perpetual, royalty-free, worldwide license to use the photo at: www.flickr.com/photos/nhussein/3437605722/sizes/o/

Read the beginning here. Go back to Part 10 here. Continue to Part 12 here.

1958 Edsel: Lousy Car But Great Planter.

Image by bill barber
Here's a link to how this same Edsel looked in 1959. I took this picture with my Brownie Hawkeye when I was thirteen.
farm2.static.flickr.com/1286/544933741_8e82112e81.jpg

A bit busy today and tomorrow, but will try to visit everyone's stream. Thanks for your patience

When my stepfather first met my mother in 1959, he was driving a brand new 1958 Ford Edsel. At that time it was touted as being far ahead of its time. The big feature was the ability of the driver to shift gears by pushing buttons on a touch pad in the centre of the steering wheel.

After a few years the Edsel was abandoned. It had become an embarrassment to Ford. The button shift did not live up to its potential, and was notorious for losing its timing. It sometimes took up to five seconds from the time you pushed a button until the time the transmission shifted, usually with a jolting 'thunk'. Further, the Edsel was an overly heavy car, even in an age of heavy cars.

I did drive it a fair bit over a ten year period, and it could be scary at times.

Over the years I wondered what happened to it. I couldn't remember it being traded in. Then, several years ago, I spotted it in the farm yard at my brother, Steve's, place. it was pretty badly smacked up, and had been used for .22 practice. I always meant to photograph it, but didn't get a chance until yesterday. It had been towed about fifty feet from where I originally saw it, and the tow had not been kind.

From my set entitled “Steve and Marg’s Farm”
www.flickr.com/photos/21861018@N00/sets/72157608031549391/
In my collection entitled “Places”
www.flickr.com/photos/21861018@N00/collections/7215760074...
In my photostream
www.flickr.com/photos/21861018@N00/

The Story of the Edsel
(taken from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edsel
The Edsel was a marquee division of Ford Motor Company during the 1958, 1959 and 1960 model years.

In the early 1950s, the Ford Motor Co. became a publicly traded corporation that was no longer entirely owned by members of the Ford family. They were then able to sell cars according to then-current market trends following the sellers' market of the postwar years. The new management compared the roster of Ford makes with that of General Motors, and noted that Lincoln competed not with Cadillac, but with Oldsmobile. Since Ford had an excess of money on hand from the success of the Ford Thunderbird the plan was developed to move Lincoln upmarket with the Continental at the top, and to add another make to the intermediate slot vacated by Lincoln. Research and development had begun in 1955 under the name "E-car," which stood for "Experimental car." This represented a new division of the firm alongside that of Ford itself and the Lincoln-Mercury division, whose cars at the time shared the same body.

The Edsel was introduced amidst considerable publicity on "E Day"—September 4, 1957. It was promoted by a top-rated television special, The Edsel Show on October 13, but it was not enough to counter the adverse public reaction to the car's styling and conventional build. For months Ford had been circulating rumours that led consumers to expect an entirely new kind of car when in reality the Edsel shared its bodywork with other Ford models.

The Edsel was to be sold through a new Ford division. It existed from November 1956 until January 1958, after which Edsels were made by the Mercury-Edsel-Lincoln division (referred to as M-E-L). Edsel was sold through a new network of 1,500 dealers. This briefly brought total dealers of all Ford products to 10,000. Ford saw this as a way to come closer to parity with the other two companies of the Big Three: Chrysler had 10,000 dealers and General Motors had 16,000. As soon as it became apparent that the Edsels were not selling, many of these dealers added Lincoln-Mercury, English Ford and/or Taunus dealerships to their lines with the encouragement of Ford Motor Company. Some dealers, however, closed.

For the 1958 model year, Edsel produced four models, including the larger Mercury-based Citation and Corsair, and the smaller Ford-based Pacer and Ranger. The Citation came in two-door and four-door hardtops and two-door convertible versions. The Corsair came in two-door and four-door hardtop versions. The Pacer came in two-door and four-door hardtops, four-door sedan, and two-door convertible. The Ranger came in two-door and four-door hardtop or sedan versions. The four-door Bermuda and Villager wagons and the two-door Roundup wagon were based on the 116" wheelbase Ford station wagon platform and shared the trim and features of the Ranger and Pacer models. It included several innovative features, among which were its "rolling dome" speedometer and its Teletouch transmission shifting system in the center of the steering wheel. Other design innovations included an ergonomically designed controls for the driver, and self-adjusting brakes (often claimed as a first for the industry, although Studebaker had pioneered them earlier in the decade).

In the first year, 63,110 Edsels were sold in the U.S. with another 4,935 sold in Canada. Though below expectations, it was still the second largest car launch for any brand to date, second only to the Plymouth introduction in 1928.

For the 1959 model year, there were only two Edsels: the Ranger and the Corsair. The two larger cars were not produced. The new Corsair came in two-door and four-door hardtops, four-door sedan, and two-door convertible. The Ranger came in two-door and four-door hardtops, two-door and four-door sedans, and the Villager station wagon. In the 1959 model year, 44,891 cars were sold in the U.S., with an additional 2,505 sales in Canada.

For the 1960 model year, Edsel's last, only the Ranger and Villager were produced. The 1960 Edsel, in its final model year, emerged as a Ford. Its grill, hood, and four taillights, along with its side sweep spears, were the only real differences separating the Edsel from the Ford.

Ford announced the end of the Edsel program on Thursday, November 19, 1959. However, cars continued being produced until late in November, with the final tally at 2,846 1960 models. Total sales were approximately 84,000, less than half McNamara's projected break-even point. The company lost 0 million on the venture [1].

On Friday, November 20, United Press International's (UPI) wire service reported that book values for used Edsels had decreased by as much as 0 [approximately 00 in 2006 dollars] (based on condition and age) immediately following the Ford press release. In some newspaper markets, dealers scrambled to renegotiate newspaper advertising contracts involving the 1960 Edsel models, while others dropped the name from their dealership's advertising "slugs." Ford issued a statement that it would distribute coupons to consumers who purchased 1960 models (and carryover 1959 models) prior to the announcement, valued at 0 to 0 towards the purchase of new Ford products to offset the decreased values. The company also issued credits to dealers for stock unsold or received, following the announcement.

There is no single reason why the Edsel failed, and failed so spectacularly. Popular culture often faults the car’s styling. Consumer Reports cited poor workmanship. Marketing experts hold the Edsel up as a supreme example of corporate America’s failure to understand the nature of the American consumer. Business analysts cite the weak internal support for the product inside Ford’s executive offices. According to author and Edsel scholar Jan Deutsch, the Edsel was "the wrong car at the wrong time."

One popular misconception was that the Edsel was an engineering failure, or a lemon, although it shared the same general reliability of its sister Mercury and Ford models that were built in the same factories. The Edsel is most famous for being a marketing disaster. Indeed, the name Edsel came to be synonymous with commercial failure, and similar ill-fated products have often been colloquially referred to as Edsels. Since it was such a debacle, it provided a case study for marketers on how not to market a product. The main reason the Edsel's failure is so famous was that it flopped despite Ford’s investment of 0,000,000 in its development.

The prerelease advertising campaign touted the car as having "...more YOU ideas," and the teaser advertisements in magazines only revealed glimpses of the car through a highly blurred lens or wrapped in paper or under tarps. Edsels were shipped to the dealerships undercover and remained wrapped on the dealer lots.

But the public also had a hard time understanding what the Edsel was, mostly because Ford made the mistake of pricing the Edsel within Mercury’s market price segment. Theoretically, the Edsel was conceived to fit into Ford’s marketing plans as the brand slotted in between Ford and Mercury. However, when the car arrived in 1958, its least expensive model—the Ranger—was priced within of the most expensive and best-trimmed Ford sedan and less than Mercury’s base Medalist model. In its midrange pricing, Edsel's Pacer and Corsair models were more expensive than their Mercury counterparts. Edsel's top-of-the-line Citation four door hardtop model was the only model priced to correctly compete with Mercury’s mid-range Montclair Turnpike Cruiser model.

Not only was the Edsel competing against its own sister divisions, but model for model, consumers did not understand what the car was supposed to be—a step up or a step below the Mercury.

After its introduction to the public, the Edsel did not live up to its overblown hype, even though it did have many new features, such as self-adjusting rear brakes and automatic lubrication. While consumer focus groups had said these and other features would make the "E" car attractive to them as car buyers, the cost of the cars outstripped what the public was willing to pay. When many potential buyers saw the base price tag, they simply left the dealership, and others were frightened by the price for a fully loaded, top of the line model.

One of the external forces working against the Edsel that Ford had no control over was the onset of the recession in late 1957.

When the Edsel was in its planning stages in the early and mid-1950s, the American economy was robust and growing. However, in the years that spanned the planning to its introduction, an economic recession hit, and American consumers not only shifted their idea of what an ideal car should be; in prior economic downturns, buyers flocked to the lower price marques like Plymouth, Chevrolet, and Ford. But in 1958, even these cars were perceived by some as unnecessarily large, and while the compact Rambler saw itself shoot to the third best selling make, none of the Big Three had anything compact to sell except their European cars built for Vauxhall, Simca, and Opel. The compacts introduced by the Big Three in 1960 were the direct result of the recession of 1958.

Compounding Edsel's problems was that the car had to appeal to buyers of other well established nameplates from the Big Three, such as Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Dodge, DeSoto, and even its internal sister division, Mercury -- itself never a stellar sales success.

Even if the 1958 recession hadn't hit when it did, the Edsel was entering into a shrinking marketplace. While Ernest Breech convinced Ford management that this market segment offered great untapped opportunity in the early 1950s, when the "E" car was in its earliest stages, by 1957, independent manufacturers in the mid-price field were drifting towards insolvency. Hoping to turn around their losses, Packard acquired Studebaker, yet the venerable Packard was no longer produced after 1958. On the other hand, American Motors changed its focus to the compact Rambler models, while their pre-merger brands (Nash and Hudson) were discontinued after the 1957 model year. Even Chrysler saw sales of its DeSoto marque drop dramatically from its 1957 high by over 50% in 1958. Following a disastrous 1959 model year, plans were made in Highland Park to discontinue DeSoto during its 1961 model year run.

Thus, the large, expensive Edsel that was planned to be all things to all people suddenly stood for excess, not progress.

The name of the car, Edsel, is also often cited as a further reason for its unpopularity. Naming the vehicle after Edsel Ford was proposed early in its development. However, the Ford family strongly opposed its use, Henry Ford II stating that he didn't want his father's good name spinning around on thousands of hubcaps. Ford also ran internal studies to decide on a name and even dispatched employees to stand outside movie theaters to poll audiences as to what their feelings were on several ideas. They reached no conclusions.

Ford hired the advertising firm Foote, Cone and Belding to come up with a name. However, when the advertising agency issued its report, citing over 6,000 possibilities, Ford's Ernest Breech commented that they had been hired to develop a name, not 6,000. Early favorites for the name brand included Citation, Corsair, Pacer, and Ranger, which were ultimately chosen for the vehicle's series names.

David Wallace, Manager of Marketing Research, and coworker Bob Young unofficially invited poet Marianne Moore for input and suggestions. Moore's unorthodox contributions (among them "Utopian Turtletop," "Pastelogram," and "Mongoose Civique") were meant to stir creative thought and were not officially authorized or contractual in nature. History has greatly exaggerated her relationship to the project.
At the behest of Ernest Breech, who was chairing a meeting in the absence of Henry Ford II, the car was finally called "Edsel" in honor of Edsel Ford, former company president and son of Henry Ford. Marketing surveys later found the name was thought to sound like the name of a tractor (Edson) and therefore was unpopular with the public.

Moreover, several consumer studies showed that people associated the name "Edsel" with "weasel" and "dead cell" (dead battery), drawing further unattractive comparisons.

Perhaps the most important factor in the Edsel's failure, however, was that when the car was introduced, the U.S. was entering a period of recession. Sales for all car manufacturers, even those not introducing new models, were down; consumers entered a period of preferring less expensive, more fuel-efficient automobiles.

Edsels were fast, but required premium gas and did not have the fuel economy desired during a recession. Mechanics disliked the bigger engine because of its unique design. The cylinder head had no combustion chamber and was perfectly flat, with the head set at an angle and "roof" pistons forming both a squish zone on one side and a combustion chamber on the other, meaning that the combustion took place entirely within the cylinder bore. This design reduced the cost of manufacture and possibly carbon buildup, but appeared strange to mechanics.

There were also reports of mechanical flaws in the models originating in the factory, due to lack of quality control and confusion of parts with other Ford models. Edsels in their first (1958) model year were made in both Mercury and Ford factories; the longer wheelbase models, Citation and Corsair, were produced alongside the Mercury products, and the shorter wheelbase models, Pacer and Ranger, were produced alongside the Ford products. There was never a stand-alone Edsel factory devoted solely to Edsel model production; workers making Fords and Mercurys literally had to change parts bins and tools to assemble extra Edsels once their hourly quota of regular Fords and Mercurys was achieved. As such, the desired quality control of the different Edsel models was difficult to attain for the new make of car. Many Edsels left the line unfinished, with the extra parts having been put into the trunks, with assembly instructions for the mechanics at the dealerships.

The Edsel is best remembered for its trademark "horsecollar" grille, which made it stand out from other cars of the period. A widely circulated wisecrack at the time was that "It looked like an Oldsmobile sucking on a lemon." Men often referred to the horsecollar grille as being akin to a woman’s genitalia. In fact, Robin Jones, a Ford designer at the time, later recalled that someone in the design studio - presumably as a cruel joke - actually taped hair to the inside of the grille area on one of the clay models produced during the design process; the end result, according to Jones, "looked like a hormonally-disturbed cow after giving birth."

Jokes aside, the front of the original Edsel turned out nothing like what was originally intended. Roy Brown, the original chief designer on the project, wanted a slender, almost delicate opening in the center; engineers, fearing engine cooling problems, vetoed the intended design, which led to the "horsecollar." The vertical grille theme, while improved for the 1959 models, was discontinued for the 1960 models, which were almost indistinguishable from Ford models of the same year, although the new front-end design bore no small resemblance to that of the 1959 Pontiac.

Many drivers disliked having the automatic transmission as pushbuttons (above) mounted on the steering wheel hub: this was the traditional location of the horn, and drivers ended up shifting gears instead of honking the horn. While the Edsel was fast, the location of the transmission pushbuttons was not conducive to street racing. There were jokes about stoplight dragsters and the buttons: D for Drag, L for Leap, and R for Race (instead of Drive, Low and Reverse).

There were also complaints about the taillights on 1958-model Edsel station wagons, which were boomerang-shaped and placed in a reverse fashion; at a distance, they appeared as arrows pointed in the opposite direction of the turn being made. While the left turn signal blinked, its arrow shape pointed right, and vice versa. However, there was little that could be done to give the Ford-based station wagons a unique appearance from the rear; corporate management insisted that no sheetmetal could be changed. Only the taillights and trim could be touched.

While the car and Ford’s planning of the car are the most often cited reasons for its failure, internal politics within the executive offices at Ford are as much to blame for the failure of the Edsel. Following World War II, Henry Ford II brought on Robert McNamara as one of the "whiz kids" to help turn Ford around. McNamara’s cost cutting and cost containment skills helped Ford emerge from its near collapse after the war. As such, McNamara eventually assumed a great deal of power at Ford. In many ways, McNamara was very much like Henry Ford: both men were committed to Ford above all other things and had little use for Continental, Lincoln, Mercury, and Edsel brand cars made by the company.

McNamara was against the formation of the separate divisions for Continental, Lincoln, Mercury, and Edsel cars, and moved to consolidate Lincoln, Mercury, and Edsel into the M-E-L division. McNamara saw to it that the Continental program was canceled and that the model was merged into the Lincoln range for 1958. He next set his sights on Edsel by maneuvering for elimination of the dual wheelbases and separate body used in 1958; instead, the Edsel would share the Ford platform and use Ford’s inner body structure for 1959. In 1960, the Edsel emerged as a Ford with different trim. McNamara also moved to reduce Edsel’s advertising budget for 1959, and for 1960, he virtually eliminated it. The final blow came in the fall of 1959, when McNamara convinced Henry Ford II and the management structure that the Edsel was doomed and that it was time to end production before the Edsel bled the company dry. (Note: McNamara also attempted to end the Lincoln nameplate; however, that effort ended with Elwood Engel's now classic redesign of 1961.) McNamara left Ford when he was named Secretary of Defense by President John F. Kennedy.

During the 1964 presidential election, Republican nominee Barry Goldwater blamed McNamara, then Secretary of Defense, for the Edsel's failure. Eventually, Ford's former executive vice president and financial contributor to Goldwater's campaign Ernest R. Breech wrote the Senator's campaign explaining that "Mr. McNamara ... had nothing to do with the plans for the Edsel car or any part of the program." However, the charge continued to be leveled against McNamara for years. During his time as head of the World Bank he instructed his public affairs officer to distribute copies of Breech's letter to the press whenever the accusation was made.[2]

The scheduled 1960 Edsel Comet compact car was hastily rebranded the Comet and assigned to Mercury dealerships. The Comet was an instant success, selling more cars in its first year than all models of Edsel produced during its three-year run. Styling touches seen in the Comets sold to the public that allude to being part of the Edsel family of models included the instrument cluster, rear tailfins (though canted diagonally), and the taillight shape (the lens is visually similar to that used on the 1960 Edsel, and even retained the embossed "E" code). The Comet's keys were even shaped like Edsel keys, with the center bar removed from the "E" to form a "C." For 1962, Ford officially assigned the Comet to the Mercury brand.

As the Edsel was a large commercial failure, the name became a popular joke in various media. A backronym, "Every Day Something Else Leaks", was inspired by the car's failure. Television programs, cartoons, video games, and films have all used the Edsel as humor, usually as a quick joke or as a sight gag.

In May 1958, then Vice President Richard Nixon was on a trip to Peru, riding in an Edsel convertible, when he was pelted with eggs and tomatoes by demonstrators. Nixon later joked: "They were throwing eggs at the car, not me."[3]

Fifty years after its spectacular failure, Edsel has become a highly collectible item amongst vintage car hobbyists. Fewer than 6,000 Edsels survive and are considered collectors’ items. A mint 1958 Citation convertible sometimes sells for over 0,000,[1] while rare models, like the 1960 convertible, may price up to 0,000. While the design was considered "ugly" fifty years ago, many other car manufacturers, such as Pontiac and Alfa Romeo, have employed similar vertical grille successfully on their car designs.
Many of the Edsel's features, such as transmission lock on ignition, adjustable brakes, gear selection as steering wheel buttons etc, which were considered "too impractical" in the late 1950s, are today standard features of sports cars.

Post Processing:
Topaz Add-On: Vibrance (HDR)
PhotoShop Elements 5: posterization, rough pastel, accented edges, ink outlines

My Buddy Abhijit

Image by Pandiyan
Isn’t it great to have a celebrity as a close friend? It sure is. He tells me he signs girls' T shirts!

The book shown here is waltzing in the bestseller lists along with Dan Brown and JK Rowling. Written by someone with whom I spent the best years of my corporate life, doing exactly what the characters in the story do. Wise-cracking, irreverent and carefree, making fun of everything, making puns at every turn and working once in a while. Mediocre But Arrogant; not exactly but something like that.

Want to know what really happens in the hallowed halls of a big-name business school? Don’t go for titles like ‘What they really teach you at Harvard’ and such. Truth is out here.

MBAs. These marauders, turned out by the dozens by business schools, invading the corporate corridors, stalking the boardrooms, weaving their web of mesmerizing magic and devilish deceptions, have effectively transformed the business organizations into powerful institutions with an A+ for economic results and F- for humaneness. Where do they come from and how are they made? Get an insider's view.

On a personal note, Abhijit is Anything But Mediocre. Jack of many trades and Master of caricaturing. Puns, limericks, silly skits, jokes, cartoons – he got me into many of those. When I torture some of my Flickr contacts with silly never ending puns, it is Abhijit who is to be blamed. But then I must admit that some his jokes are good. Otherwise serious publishing houses wouldn’t have bothered to publish his writing throwing good money. Then again, it may be bad money and may be his jokes are the kind people like and goodness has nothing to do with it.

Meet Bhaduri Abhijit. Do read his blog for a flavour of the book. What next Abhijit? Syndicated columns, movies, Abbey dolls.... Sequels definitely, I reckon. Speculating in possible titles... Well, the protogonist is likely to graduate and step into the corporate world. So Married But Available, Mean Beast Always, Mayhem Bedlam And .... You are welcome to suggest. I'll get him to send you a free copy if he likes your title.