I suppose I can’t actually prove that this soldier, who appears to wear the uniform of a British soldier in the Victorian era, is somehow demonic, but there’s something about the way this soldier is portrayed that certainly feels hellish. I mean, look at the color palette, the brushwork, the imposing, almost inhuman manner which the soldier looms, ready to summon the minions of hell to get you to buy a Chrysler.
The Chryslers in question here are 1963 models, a Windsor, Saratoga, and New Yorker. Of these three, in 1963 the Windsor and Saratoga were Canada-only nameplates, for maple-soaked reasons I can’t even guess at. In the US, the equivalent was the Chrysler Newport, and then there was the New Yorker looming above them all, but I’ll be honest, Chrysler’s arcane nomenclature for their tiers of trim levels has always sort of baffled me.
But that’s not why we’re here! We’re here to ponder the strange illustrations in this 1963 brochure!
Why are there British soldiers around, exactly? Those there with the tall black furry hat look like what are commonly called Beefeaters, but are technically known as Yeoman Warders. Chrysler is an American company, as as far as I know has never enjoyed the services of any Beefeaters, since no Chrysler has ever ascended to any position of royalty in the UK.
Some of the other soldiers are other kinds of Victorian-era British soldiers, but all are painted in such a way that suggests they’re completely surrounded by flames and a general inferno.
Also, look at that dashboard, because it has one of my favorite Chrysler details:
The squircle wheel! Other carmakers have played with these not-quite-round wheels, but I think Chrysler was one of the first. It’s subtle but unmistakable, and I perversely like it.
Look at this soldier here; what do they want? They’re in some deeply crimson hellfire there, riding, it seems, right towards us, unflinchingly, expressionless and terrifying.
I’m not sure how this advancing demonic old British soldier is convincing me to buy a car, but it does make em divert my eyes from fear and notice some interesting details on that New Yorker wagon:
Look at the little rubber stops on the tailgate, designed to rest on the bumper; and what’s going on with those other strange little rubber wedges on either side of the bumper? They seem far too small to be actual bumper guards or even steps, so what the hell are they?
I do like what I think are optional reverse lamps in those big wide oblongs on the bumper. I’m pretty sure I’ve seen them just metal, too, but those look like clear lenses there, I think?
Is it just me? Those soldiers seem strangely imposing and demonic, don’t they? The illustrations are beautifully done, but the color and style was a definite choice, a choice that’s frankly confusing, Why soldiers? Why British? Why paint it to look like a conflagration?
Oh well. I guess I don’t understand the nuances of midcentury advertising.
My nominee for the best dashboard of the sixties. Windsor, [sometimes] Saratoga, and New Yorker were Chysler’s standard lineup from 1939 through 1960. In 1961, the new Newport came in below the Windsor to take over for DeSoto and Windsor moved up for a year until the 300 Series replaced it in 1962. Canada chose to stay with what they had, name-wise.
A column written to soothe the raging beast with nothing intelligent to actually write about.
Actually so is everything I’ve seen on The Autopian of late.
I still do not like this new Cold Start Logo. Pete, please help! Jason seems not to care. Oh, the humanity.
okay, okay, I’ll take another crack at it!
Thank You! I figured out it’s the stark gray I hate. I’m laughing as I apologize here. But man, I really hate that gray void. More blue for cold, less gloomy gray? Excuse me while I go slap myself.
I want you to know I have completely re-designed the Cold Start logo, just for you. If you’ve been looking for a good reason to become an official Autopian member, I think you may have found one! https://www.theautopian.com/membership-experience/
Thank you again so much! It made my day and frankly, looks better. I simply love the red H in particular. Very professional.
Become a member so you can make Jason do stupid shit like this for you too, maybe.
But seriously, that was a really cool thing to do.
There are no Yeoman Warders in ths brochure. The infantry in the bearskin hats are Foot Guards, specifically Grenadier Guards because of the single tunic buttons. The other regiment have the buttons grouped, pairs for the Coldstream Guards, threes for Scots and so on. The guys on horses are Household Cavalry, the first one withe blue tunic is from The Blues and Royals regiment and the red cape is from The Life Guards.
Why they chose these for a Chrysler ad is a question for the ages
They’re also, I think, all contemporary dress uniforms not Victorian as Jason suggests?
Well, both really, as in the parade uniforms haven’t changed for ~150 years, and they still wear them today. About the only obvious change is the type of firearm they carry.
So, Satan’s army is selling cars? Sounds about right.
Isn’t Canada a little bit British? Like, they share a monarch, and the police are called “Royal” Canadian Mounted Police, and things like that
Canada is becoming less and less British every year like all former colonies of the Evil Empire. As their seniors pass from old age Canada moves to cutting all such ties, but this will likely pause while Fuhrer Trump is threatening to make “Canada into a state”…
Only to little old ladies…
I think the reverse light on the wagon is actually the single asymmetric oval next to the license plate.
That’s the license plate lamp, one of two. It shines on the plate.
It looks like the rubber pieces on the wagon are asymmetrical… The left one extends over the cutline for the trunk while the right one does not.
That four door wagon is awesome,I want one.
Not to mention the open styled rails going down (or is it up?) the rear corners. Handholds to steady one when using the tiny rubber foot steps on the bumper.
Your equation of british army and the bearskins raised some very fuzzy (hah) childhood memory. Quick search, and yes, some detachments of the RCA do include bearskin head gear in their ceremonial dress.
And it’s not unheard of elsewhere: a great grandfather claimed that he was only turned down for the Danish Royal Guard for being 6″, when the minimum requirement was 6’1″ at time (pre-great war), and some childlike soul responded to the story by asking why they couldn’t make the hat an inch taller?
(and the chryslers are nice too. is this post-exner?)
This Is Spinal Tap
i still have never seen the movie, despite all the good things i’ve heard over the decades. which part checks in, Canadians, Danes, ancestral “tall” tales, or bearskin hats?
Turning the volume up to 11. When I could’ve just made 10 a little bit louder.
The movie is worth a watch
ah, i never knew the origin of that joke.
” I do not, for one, think that the problem was that the band was down. I think that the problem *may* have been, that there was a Stonehenge monument on the stage that was in danger of being *crushed* by a *dwarf*.”
after Nigel specified 20″ instead of 20′ as you inadvertently made your great grandad 6″
For quite a while Canada had a whole bunch of renamed american cars due to legal reasons. For example a friend of mine had a Mercury truck, my uncle has an Acaidian, and another friend is restoring an old Beaumont. Those three were rebadges of the Ford f150, Chevy Nova, and Chevelle respectively. Honestly if I could get my hands on an Acadian or Beaumont of my own I’d be ecstatic.
The YJ and TJ Jeeps were never called “Wrangler” here in Canada because GM had a trademark on “Wrangler” as an S-10 trim level. I guess they gave it up when the JK came out.
It wasn’t legal reasons, exactly, as we got the normal versions of all those models. Some of it was to keep the dealer networks happy so that they weren’t losing sales to the Ford or Chev dealer down the street (see any number of cheap Pontiacs right up to the Wave/G3 rebadge of the Aveo right before the brand was shuttered entirely).There was some legal requirement for Canadian production pre-Auto Pact, but that didn’t necessarily have much to do with branding (perhaps except inadvertently, to make the marketing of Canadian-made vehicles more obvious).
Fair enough, my understanding was that it was mainly tax reasons, like LBJ’s damned chicken tax down here. Thanks for enlightening me, history is fascinating.
Whaddya know, there was actually some precedent for the official portrait of His Majesty King Charles III?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5b/Charles_III_by_Jonathan_Yeo.jpg?20240628000122
Who is also the king of Canada!
I’ve been working as a graphic designer/creative director for 25 years. I LOVE looking at older advertising like this. I can’t help but feel sometimes designers had a little more fun back in the day. These days most of the ad work I do consists of meaningless, throwaway copy with equally meaningless stock photos of people casually busy in an office environment. But this? Let’s show a bunch of weird-ass, strangely styled paintings of British gaurds. Why the fuck not?
And the other thing too is that this was made right in the middle of the paste-up era where you had to cut it all out including the copy. So someone spent a lot of time putting that together. Sometimes I wish I was older and got to see what that was like versus shoving shit around on a screen.
Nothing demonic going on, however, that squircle wheel is an abomination amalgamation of the golden ratio and brings chaos to the dynamical systems theory.
It was a warning of what you can expect if you buy a Chrysler. No matter when you read this.
“Why is there a soldier from hell selling Chryslters?” is one of the least far-fetched questions I’ve seen on this site. I’ve been to a Chrysler dealership.
I’m reminded of those dudes who hung out with Palpatine and Vader. You have to believe that this ad got stuck in Lucas’ head when he was younger.
If you want to see a film with the all ‘new’ 1960 Chrysler Corporation convertibles – watch “Bachelor in Paradise” – starring Bob Hope and Lana Turner.
You won’t regret it.
Bob Hope- so relevant in 1970, so forgotten now.
Unfortunate about him seeming to be so forgotten now, as Hope set a pretty good example as a fairly staunch conservative who came around on gay rights and gun control issues despite being friends with Anita Bryant, the Reagans, & other prominent conservatives of the day; he ended up being somewhat if not outright ostracized by some of those people despite their friendship.
https://www.newspapers.com/article/philadelphia-daily-news-05201981-bh-ph/102705868/
https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/hope-for-america/blurringlines/controversy/Assets/bhp0142_enlarge.jpg
And when he made some jokes that were quite problematic (including the use of homophobic slurs) he apologized rather than doubling down; in fact, after such an incident he actually made a PSA at his own expense for GLAAD despite being 85 and presumably pretty set in his ways: https://youtu.be/pDO34rXZJg4?si=2jxWg4BNPaCmUdGc
And he co-hosted a benefit with Liz Taylor to raise funds for AIDS research in 1986 despite the massive anti-AIDS hysteria of that period (yeah, it’s hard for young ‘uns to fathom just how viciously virulent such sentiments were back then.)
So, yeah, he may be largely forgotten but he still has some relevance today as an example of someone willing to change their mind on issues of human rights rather than just doubling down.
I just remember as a kid he was everywhere, but I’m pretty sure my kids have no idea who he was. I was shocked that my 21 year-old knew who Sam Elliott was.
So your kid is a Big Lebowski fan then, eh?
No, I think it’s because he was in the Lady Gaga “Star is Born”.
I did not know anything about Bob Hope’s progress on these issues or that PSA, which apparently wasn’t aired widely despite his appearance in it. (And had he. not been in it, it probably would have been limited to breaks in the more bizarre shows on public access channels, which is also something da kidz should learn about.)
Not really. Just replace “AIDS” with “transgender” and you’ll have a pretty good idea.
But yeah, sounds like he set an example more people could stand to follow these days.
Canada was officially a self-governing British colony until 1982 when its constitution was completed. That status was granted in 1867. It became a British commonwealth in 1949 with the dissolution of the British Empire. Notionally, it was British when those Chryslers were produced, though not practically. Incidentally, New York, Saratoga and Windsor were battle sites, the first two from the American Revolution and the latter from the weird Patriot War that ranged from Michigan to Canada in the mid 19th century. That color palette suggests that the British Empire was burning down.
Came here to make sure this was noted, leaving satisfied.
“ Those there with the tall black furry hat look like what are commonly called Beefeaters, but are technically known as Yeoman Warders. ”
The big tall hat is a bearskin, worn as dress uniform by parts of the British army. Often seen standing very still four hours on end outside Buckingham Palace, anyone wearing one is a soldier.
A beefeater wears a cloth hat and tries not to get cross with tourists at the Tower of London. They are former servicemen/women/persons.
I just googled and bearskins are still made of actual bears!
Like silly dress-up hats couldn’t be made of anything else or be changed to not look like a massive merkin. Urgh, it’s so embarrassing being British.
Still infinitely better than the Greek Presidential Guards, who wear Victorian nightgowns with tassels on their ankles and pompoms on their feet. And a march that seems like the Ministry of Silly Walks was commissioned to come up with it
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_Guard_(Greece)
And the (Catholic) Pope’s Swiss Guard
Eh, those were more or less actual battlefield uniforms, once upon a time.
They’re also TAME compared to Landsknecht outfits
Wouldn’t it be cool if they brought those uniforms back for regular soldiers!
The various Guards regiments are regular soldiers. Typically a third of the regiment will be wearing these uniforms doing ceremonial duties, a third will be on training/leave, and a third will be on active duty overseas.
I mean, what if they wore these uniforms in battle!
Beserker, as in going beserk comes from the hats, Anglo Saxon/ Old Norse, those who wear the bearskin, yes it is embarrassing. Which is why I am a Welsh Viking .
I’m English, the worst kind of British.
I’m not even from the North, or at least not North enough to be able to generate some modicum of pride from it.
I think being a Yeoman Warder still considered an active duty posting?
And yes, their uniforms are very different from the ones in the ad. For one, their uniforms have the current Regent’s Latin initials on them (currently “CR III”, for “Carolus Rex III”)
Wait, his name is Carol?
So embarrassing.
At least he wasn’t named Sue…
Apparently it’s Latin for “Charles”
Yet another baffling tradition of the upper classes.
For a start you don’t translate peoples names in to other languages. Your name is your name, regardless of which country you’re in or which language you’re speaking.
And then there’s the use of Latin. The language forced on us 2000 years ago by invaders, then adopted by a church our actual king rejected 500 years ago. Binning the use of Latin in religion was a big issue.
I’ll call him Carol from now on though, “King Charles” always makes me think of a spaniel.
I mean, Christianity didn’t so much “adopt” the Latin language as “use the language that most of its adherent already spoke“.
Also, pretty much all of the English language qualifies as “language forced on us by invaders”, unless you’re referring to the bits derived from old Celtic, and quite frankly, Latin isn’t even the third-oldest foreign language forced on you.
And Henry VIII didn’t “reject” the church so much as “wanted to grab all of their land for himself.” If he actually “rejected” the Catholic Church, why did they keep most of the outfits? (/s, though pretty much everyone refers to the Anglican church as “Catholic-lite”)
Yeah, it’s just constant waves of invaders slowly making the place better. Plumbing, buildings, food, words, everything.
The pillarless look in that wagon kind of messes with my brain, Escher-like. Did the artist mess up the perspective a little, or is that how it really looked from that angle?
They really looked like that:
https://www.autoevolution.com/news/1963-chrysler-town-country-is-not-a-minivan-but-a-rare-9-passenger-wagon-205044.html
Wow, that is a weird looking thing.
I kinda love these things. They’re pretty much all either really well preserved and expensive or they’re rotted out. But if you could find one in decent-ish shape they could make a great project car. Plenty of room to add or subract anything, engine swap, you name it. And they’re massive inside, so they would be a great road trip vehicle