Town Square, March 1962
It's always nice to find an especially rare and spectacular view of Disneyland, but I am often very happy to have photos that are good, vintage "you are there" images. Like today's humble photos taken in Town Square (possibly just as our photographer walked through the east tunnel?).
I'm not sure if those people were with the photographer, or if they just happened to walk in front of the camera at an inopportune moment. The man looks like he works at Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce. He thought up the phrase, "Uh-oh, Spaghetti-Os!", and that made him a wealthy man. As it should. I'm always glad to see the Wurlitzer store, with its tasteful pale yellow and soft green.
Quick! Take a picture of that horseless carriage! You have to be spontaneous when you are taking photos at Disneyland. Is that particular horseless carriage considered a "jitney"? Maybe not. Notice the little flower bed, I wonder how long that survived? Those darn flowers are taking up valuable guest space! In the extreme upper right, almost cropped out of the photo, is a souvenir paper parasol.
It looks something like this!
26 comments:
Even though we have a bright blue sunny sky, the temperature must still be pretty chilly in these March photos. People are wearing their winter coats and jackets. And this particular group is dressed rather spiffily.
The gentleman from the ad agency also gave us the names: "Fizzies" and "Tang".
Thanks for the Town Square images, Major.
Major-
SpaghettiOs - "It's the greatest invention since the napkin!" And to think, Campbell vetoed cowboy, spaceman, and star shapes before choosing the "O". That's what Main Street USA needs - a SpaghettiOs restaurant.
After seeing the current 'look' of all the Main Street buildings - with their needlessly-intense paints and 'busy' finishes - these views are downright soothing and inviting.
Thanks, Major.
The pattern on that lady's coat (first pic) would make for good wallpaper, in a haunted house.
The former Wurlitzer building was most recently a soft grayish-green and off-white. But knowing how much a certain somebody likes to use bright colors without any regard, they are probably painting the building lemon yellow and Kelly green, at this very moment.
I like these "you are there" photos, Major! I also like that parasol. Do you have one of those?
This Main Street USA will never be again….even the replication is disappearing. Major: technically the Disneyland “Horseless carriages” included the 1901 electrics and the 1903 Tonneau’s . The Tonnneau referred to any passenger car with open seats in the rear ( as opposed to a runabout or roadster) the term Tonneau fell out of favor in America by the late teens and was replaced with TOURING as in TOURING CAR. A cabriolet originally referred to a open car that the rear passenger section could be closed. A Jitney is a bus like vehicle similar to a depot hack. I just learned that the term JITNEY was a term for “a nickel” and over time referred to a inexpensive short ride.
Walt Disney World’s Main Street USA features a actual JITNEY …. It looks like a friendly happy paddy wagon. In fact for years WDW guests often refer to it as a Paddy Wagon! The WDW JITNEY uses the same chassis and hood as the Main Street Fire Engine with a different body - but they are the same basic vehicle. WDW had 3 horseless carriages , 1 Jitney , 1 fire engine , 2 Omnibuses and 4 street cars.
Disneyland Paris and Hong Kong Disneyland both feature POLICE PADDY WAGONS.
Mike, one of Tokyo DisneySea's "Big City Vehicles," is also a Paddy Wagon.
Tokyo; I was gonna include the Tokyo Disney Seas BIG CITY VEHICLES … but they are somewhat of an odd bird. Because they drive between American Waterfront and Port Discovery ( a Art Deco/post steam punk Themed area ) the art directors decided to take the authentic looking designs and “sci-fi” them up. BOB GURR HATES THEM!! What I dint like is that I don’t think guests understand the double duty use theme of the cars so it makes them looks like something made by people who didn’t really do their research or understand what they were designing ( even though they did) they look the way trains , buildings abs wagons look in Spaghetti Westerns ….. you get what it’s suppose to be , but there’s something very wrong and odd about it…… The BIG CITY VEHICLES were made by the same British company that made the HK DL Railroad locomotives. The vehicles are all electric and sponsored by TESLA MOTORS.
Ahhh…Town Square with benches and free-range grass. I know I never saw it quite like this, but this is how it looks in my mind. Well, all except for the Martian tripods turning their heat ray on the crowds.
It’s hard to tell from this angle, but the man to the right of the woman in the wallpaper coat appears to be carrying a Kodak Signet 35 around his neck. I’ll bet it’s full of good old, Rochester-made Kodachrome film. Either that or chocolate pudding. There’s just enough room in the film chamber for a tasty snack whenever the mood strikes you.
I just reviewed the "new" Main St. that Sue posted yesterday in a link. I'm glad we have these photos of a different time. I wrote a rant and deleted it. I'm not sure where the company intends to go with paint. The've gone there. TRE. If I could put that in larger type, I would. Thanks for posting this morning. I'm not sure we'll see this Main Street again.
I see the Hills Bros. Sign. I hope my Mom and Dad are in the garden there, holding hands over their morning coffee. I’m probably off in the line for the Matterhorn.
I’m pretty sure Dad had a camera like that, but I never saw it used. Mom said the film was no longer made? Was that true, or did they just move on to instamatics?
I do love these photos, and “Sometimes, a Time is also a Place.”
JG
I should add that I long for that Time, and that Place, but it’s gone for good. I have to find what I need in this Time and this Place.
Thanks Major, I appreciate the moment, however brief.
JG
Great comments. I still am struck by the fact people wore suits and evening clothes to Disneyland. Mom and Dad got sort of dressed up but no ties or jackets. Tourists from Tucson nice. We were there all that decade and I can't remember seeing suits. Not surprising at all. Other things to look at besides other people.
TM, you are spot on with that lady's coat. Even the same shade of purple.
I too, long for those times and places. This time and place we must face, like it or not, as you say JG. Lucky are we to have those memories though.
Thanks Major.
Yes, it must have been cold. Everyone on the horseless carriage has a hat too. Another pretty much childless set of photos that is just the opposite of today (I think there’s a kid or two way in the background of the first picture). Thanks, Major.
JG, you may be thinking of the Kodak Pony 828, which had a similar design. It used size 828 film, which was a paper-backed, sprocketless 35mm format. It was never very popular and Kodak stopped making it in 1985. In this case, though, I don't think it's a Pony 828; the 828 didn't have a knob on the top of the camera to the photographer's right, and you can see one in this picture peeking over the top of the leather camera case. The Kodak Pony 135 was a near clone to the Pony 828 (but chambered in familiar, sprocketed 35mm, also known as "size 135") and is a candidate, but the lens housing doesn't look right to me. I'm still leaning towards the Signet 35 (which I neglected to link a picture of earlier), although it could, of course, be something else.
JB, yes, even though these were date-stamped in March, they could have been taken in February - and it can get pretty cold! Not like Wisconsin, but 50 degrees at Disneyland is not ideal. Whoa, “Fizzies” and “Tang”! He got all his best ideas when he was drunk.
Nanook, we all know that the napkin changed western history, so the fact that Spaghetti-Os was equally as important… pretty amazing. Looking at that Westcoaster site was depressing, there was so much that bummed me out. Whoever (*ahem*) is in charge of the color schemes must be color blind.
TokyoMagic!, you’re right, that pattern has eyes, and I swear they blink occasionally. I wish the former Wurlitzer building was lavender and pink, with baby blue accents.
Mike Cozart, I have sure never heard the term “Tonneau” before, and I know everything about cars! Well, maybe not everything. I figured that the horseless carriage in that photo was built to carry 8-ish passengers, which might have qualified it as some sort of old-timey “bus”. I know that WDW has actual Jitneys, I’ve had photos of them here! Paddy Wagons, so do guests actually ride in the back like prisoners??
TokyoMagic!, you KNOW you’re in the BIG CITY when you see a Paddy Wagon.
Mike Cozart, ugh, it must have been pretty terrible for Bob Gurr to see the way things were changing at the parks, and at Imagineering in general. When somebody like him falls out of favor, that’s a sign that things have gone to hell. I assume that the Tesla sponsorship is fairly recent, were those vehicles sponsored by some other company before that?
Chuck, yes, I never saw Town Square like this either, and I don’t even really recall seeing that little planter with the daisies (I know, they probably aren’t daisies). And I see that I’m not the only one who thought of smuggling chocolate pudding into the park inside my camera!
Bu, yes, sometimes we realize that our rants are like shouting at the clouds. It’s just amazing to me how saturated all the colors are, all around the park. If you look at Main Street in the 50s and 60s, it is colorful, but all of the hues have been softened, they don’t look like “straight out of the tube” colors. I strongly dislike the way it looks, but guarantee that the general public “loves the bright colors”.
JG, funny about you remembering your dad having a camera like the one in the photo; that made me think… do I ever remember my dad even holding a camera?? NO! My mom was the photographer in the family, I’m sure my dad must have taken some pictures, but it must have been rare.
JG, yes, looking at old photos definitely makes one long for bygone days.
DrGoat, I suppose that it makes sense that the ladies would be wearing their long coats on chilly days. We see lots early photo with men wearing their suits and ties to Disneyland, though by 1962 it seems a bit less common. Folks started to get a lot more casual! Aloha shirts and such.
Kathy!, the few kids at the park got lucky, they had folks who were willing to take them out of school for a day! THE DREAM.
Chuck, interesting; paper-backed film sounds like something from the 1920s! How did they develop the negatives? Did the paper peel off? You sure know a lot about cameras. And buses.
Major, I remember both of my parents taking pictures but we seemed to only have had one camera at a time.
I first remember a Kodak Instamatic that used flash cubes and the drop-in film, but sometime later, in the 70's I think, Dad bought a Minolta instamatic that used the same film and flash cubes, but had an adjustable lens. The focus was sort of fixed but there were three settings, close-up, multiple portraits, and landscape. This is the one I remember them using the most. I don't know what happened to it.
My uncle gave me a used Mamiya SLR in the early 70's and I took it to Disneyland a lot. I just can't find many of the pictures I took, which bums me out. I must have thrown them out in a move.
Chuck, that camera in the post looks a lot like the one I remember, but none of the ones you linked look right to me. The conversation with Mom about discontinued film took place about 20 years before the date you cite for the other film, so I don't think that is the camera I remember.
Thanks for all the research, much appreciated.
JG
I should just give up on work today.
Chuck, here is a link to a pic of the Minolta camera I remember. The focal length knob is on the right side in the photo.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/121083206119
JG
I LOVE that wallpaper coat. I’d wear it today.
JG, it’s weird, I always wanted to get into photography in a more serious manner, but it never happened. I even went to a school that had a good “beginning photography” class, which my best friend took. I think I was too focused on drawing and painting classes. But I’ve always wished that I understood more about lenses and apertures and that sort of stuff, very basic I’m sure. As for cameras, I remember my dad had an old (but probably very nice) one in a leather case in the closet, but I don’t remember him ever using it. Maybe it belonged to a relative and he inherited it? My mom must have gotten rid of it at some point (like so many things!). I eventually bought a nice Nikon 35mm camera, but never was any good with the thing.
JG, quit work! Look at blogs! ;-)
Melissa, it is pretty cool, I have to admit. Almost an upholstery pattern.
TokyoMagic!, I forgot to say, no, I don’t have one of those paper parasols. I’ve seen them for sale occasionally, but they are big and fragile, and I decided to spend my money elsewhere.
Major: I actually was familiar with the term “tonneau” when I was pretty young : I used to collect MATCHBOX MODELS OF YESTERYEAR models and one of my favorites was a 1912 Simplex Tonneau ( American ) but In early publications they refer to the red horseless carriage as a 1903 Tonneau …. And thought it was because you entered Thru the rear of the car …. When the yellow horseless carriage was added the red car was converted to the same seating arrangement and still called a Tonneau . Bob Gurr explains some these details in a 1976 issue of HOT RODDER magazine. Ah … I think Tesla became a sponsor of the BIG CITY VEHICLES about 10 years ago. The company does not use its actual logo but a 1910 style appropriate graphic created by WDI. The BIG CITY VEHICLES has quite a large fleet and features 4 different routes through American Waterfront , New England Seaport and Port Discovery. Some routes are just scenic others take you to specific destination stops. The fleet features TONNEAUS, VICTORIAS, PHAETONS, LANDAUS, TAXI CABS , DEPOT OMNIBUSES, JITNEYS, ROADSTERS , DELIVERY TRUCKS and even a beer TRUCK where guests seat are in the back atop barrels! It’s ok these are all electric for the 1905-1915 theme …. As in the first decade of the 20th century there were more electric and steam automobiles than gasoline powered. The BIG CITY VEHICLE designs are mixes of automobiles by FRANKLIN, MAXWELL, AUTOCAR and some early PACKARDS ….. but again with some sci-fi/fantasy flourishes to create a sort of 1910 “Car of the Future” look.
Oh … I almost forgot : the Horseless Carriage ( yellow) and the Fire Engine from Tokyo Disneyland were relocated to Tokyo Disney Sea and also service AMERICAN WATERFRONT. Today only the Omnibuses service World Bazaar and Central Plaza. In the 1990’s the original TDL 1983 Fire Engine ( identical to WDW’s) was replaced with a brand new larger Fire Engine built from the plans for the Disneyland Paris FIRE ENGINE. The Paris Fire engine - although is Main St. USA , it’s based on a British DENNIS FIRE MOTORWAGEN prototype.
Correction “ in early DISNEYLAND publications “ the term Tonneau is used for the red 1903 horses carriage.
Major, thanks for including the parasol photo. I can only imagine how fragile one would be by now. I'm sure there aren't many still in existence.
By memory, I don't recall what people wore to Disneyland in the early years, but I definitely remember Disneyland being "empty" like this. I even remember WDW being empty, at times.
Lucky are we to have those memories though.
And, DrGoat, may I add, "Lucky are we to have other friends, here, to share those memories with."
Love that coat pattern, too.
Thanks, Major.
Major, while 828 had a paper backing, the image was still recorded on acetate like 35m film. The paper protected the roll film from unwanted light exposure when outside the camra and also protected the rolled up portions if the camera was opened accidentally in the light. The paper and spool were removed and discarded during processing (unless you asked for it back).
Medium-format 120 roll film being manufactured today still has a paper backing. 126 ("Instamatic") and 110 ("Pocket Instamatic") also had/have paper backing to the film, but as the film was/is enclosed in a cartridge the only part of the paper you could see was the exposure number.
828 is kind of interesting. It was developed a year after 135 film (what we think of as "35mm") and is the same width as 135 but doesn't have any sprocket holes, instead taking its design cues from roll film like 120 and 620. The lack of sprocket holes allows the camera to record larger images than 135 on the same width film stock.
Its roll design also allowed it to be used in larger, medium-format cameras like the Kodak Medalist, Reflex, or Tourist with a special adapter, which meant you could take slides that would fit in a standard 2"x 2" cardboard mount with the same camera you were taking your family photos with. The downside, of course, was that you lost a significant amount of image area by using 828 in a 620 camera (like using a lens designed for a film SLR camera on a less-than-full-frame digital SLR). You also had to remember that the film was only going to capture the center of what was i the viewfinder, so you had to be careful with framing your shot or you might have an imbalanced composition or miss your subject altogether.
I have my grandfather's 828 adapter and his Kodak Reflex, but I haven't found any evidence that he ever used it to shoot 828 film.
And we do know that your dad took at least a few pictures. ;-)
JG, I'm sorry I didn't find the right camera for you. I'm not sure what other discontinued format that camera might have been built for; there are other discontinued formats but the dates don't make sense with that camera design. Kodak stopped making 828 cameras for the US market in 1959 and I know the film was pretty hard to find by the mid '60s.
Thanks for the link to the Minolta Autopak 600-X. That listing is a prime example of an eBay seller who takes a stab at a date and gets it wrong - the camera was actually released in 1972. And man - that focusing design is really different. I understand that the idea is to make it overly simple for the consumer, but it goes against what I am used to. And putting the focusing knob on the left side of the camera is counterintuitive as well. It would not have been conducinve to rapid focusing and framing and holding the camera steady.
In case anyone is interested, here's a link to the manual for the 600-X.
Sue, You are so right. Lucky indeed.
Chuck, now based on your additional info and dates, it was probably an 828. It was a long time ago.
Also thanks for the date on the Minolta. That is consistent with my memory, I remember Dad taking it on trips in the early 70's and having my own SLR at the same time.
The focus knob was not meant for rapid focusing or framing. It was very much a snapshot camera. You had to decide what type of photo you were making and click through to the focus type you wanted and then take the photo. There was an indicator in the viewfinder so you could tell what setting you were on, and I believe the framing changed so you could sort-of see what you were getting.
As I recall, I kept in landscape setting most of the time and this provided decent results even if you forgot to change it. The little icons were cute, a stylized single person oval head and shoulders, two (or maybe three) people oval heads and shoulders, and two stylized mountain peaks.
Thanks again. I can see Dad holding it now. It's a good memory.
JG
So many years. So many cameras. So many good memories.
Mike, Jitneys came about by enterprising auto owners who undercut trolley operators by offering nickel (Jitney) fares on the same routes. The trolley operators usually had contracts with the towns to maintain the roads they operated on, so they were understandably upset and eventually bankrupted as private businesses.
Chuck, that Minolta is definitely a 1970s camera based on the industrial design. The Kodak 110 instamatics I remember from my childhood had very similar styling- silver lettering on black plastic housing with flat faces and rounded corners.
Post a Comment