Deborah Nadoolman's fedora comments - verbatim

3thoubucks · Post by **3thoubucks** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 5:16 am

Just for the record, from the Bonus Material DVD === "In terms of his hat, I had to have a hat that was uniqe, but looked like EVERY hat. I had to have a hat, that, if you saw it in silhouette, would instantly be recognizable. There's a very famous, ahh, men's hatter in Britain, on Saville Row.., Herbert Johnson. ...I saw a hat with ... a, v e r y wide brim, and the crown was a little bit too high... It was their Australian model. And, with a couple of fittings, we got the hat right for Harrison. Got it really dirty. I took the hat and I rolled it up in my hands, sat on it...had Harrison sit on it, and when we got through with it, it looked like a nice, old, very well loved hat." ................................. .......................................................................

Neolithic · Post by **Neolithic** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 6:23 am

I think Sable Row is somewhere in Canada...

What is this 'Australian' model?

In the thread over in General Gear about Red Wings vs Aldens, Sergei said this:

I remember a conversation MK had with Debroah Nadooleman-Landis - the costume designer. It wasn't that long ago. She insists to this day, that Harrison wore RedWings for Raiders per her design.

So who do we believe?

3thoubucks · Post by **3thoubucks** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 6:48 am

So?????? ...At least I got "siloete" right.

Rob · Post by **Rob** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 6:53 am

I think it was just a regular hat, but they wanted to nick some Australian good karma, so now they say it was an Australian model...

Hemingway Jones · Post by **Hemingway Jones** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 9:00 am

I saw a hat with ... a, v e r y wide brim, and the crown was a little bit too high...

I find her description interesting: the crown was a bit too high? So we assume it had some sort of bash when they found it (or os this a false assumption?), but the crown was too high and they lowered to the Indy height. I find that amazing.

Scandinavia Jones · Post by **Scandinavia Jones** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 9:19 am

Rob wrote:I think it was just a regular hat, but they wanted to nick some Australian good karma, so now they say it was an Australian model...

Actually, I think you're quite right, Rob. I'm sure Nadoolman improvised a bit re: the Australian connection... the Poet has not much to do with Oz.

Swindiana · Post by **Swindiana** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 9:38 am

I find her description interesting: the crown was a bit too high? So we assume it had some sort of bash when they found it (or os this a false assumption?), but the crown was too high and they lowered to the Indy height. I find that amazing.

I've always assumed from hearing her saying it that they used the 'a little bit too high' as a feature for the final hat, the shape that they were looking for and that they didn't want it lower. Compared to other 80's movies featuring fedoras, the hat just seems a bit bigger than your standard shaped hat, unique in its appearance in that manner. You think?

Regards,
Swindiana

Dakota Ellison · Post by **Dakota Ellison** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 10:19 am

I was in London once in 1970. Checked out Apple Records which was on the actual street Saville Row. So, my question is, is that whole area considered Saville Row? As we all know, HJ was in 13 Old Burlington ST. at the time.
As it turned out Paul announced that The Beatles were no more just two days after we were there.

Scandinavia Jones · Post by **Scandinavia Jones** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 11:19 am

Old Burlington Street runs parallel to Saville Row. Not the same place... I believe the area is called Mayfair (Londoners, correct me if I'm wrong).

Again, this shows that not everything Nadoolman says is necessarily true.

Feraud · Post by **Feraud** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 11:45 am

My feeling is that Nadoolman's comment regarding the crown being, "a little bit too high" could be a subjective opinion based on her experiences. She was doing her job for a movie in the 80's and was probably subject to the fashion whims of the 1980's, like the rest of us!

I am not aware if she was commenting on the height of men's hat crown's from the 30's, 40's, etc. or specifically that specific hat for her specific needs. "A little bit too high" sounds like a personal observation.

It is hard enough for historians to maintain an objective eye towards the past. I would think a costume designer would have a tendency to add "artistic license" to their work. Especially when they are creating something for a film, as opposed to uncovering an actual 1930's era fedora and putting it on display.

Hemingway Jones · Post by **Hemingway Jones** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 12:06 pm

Swindy wrote:

I've always assumed from hearing her saying it that they used the 'a little bit too high' as a feature for the final hat, the shape that they were looking for and that they didn't want it lower. Compared to other 80's movies featuring fedoras, the hat just seems a bit bigger than your standard shaped hat, unique in its appearance in that manner. You think?

Swindy,
I think you can read it that way. So, my friend, I think you're right. But there are other ways of reading her transcript.

It is a funny thing about Syntax, you can deconstruct what some one is saying and often find multiple meaning imbeded in their speech. I'll have to watch the interview sometime soon and see what her body language and mannerisms add to her speech. Looking at the transcript, it is easy to read it as you state: that it was a hat with a tall crown, high for its day, circa 1980.

Also, you can look at in the manner I was infering: that it was "a little bit too high...And, with a couple of fittings, we got the hat right for Harrison." This could easily be construed as, "It was too high when I found it, we played with it a while on Harrison's head and got it right for him." But does part of this fitting mean the crown height was lowered?

By her saying that it was "a little bit too high" seems to infer that it was litterally just that, "too high," and then they lowered the crown height to suit Harrison. Of course, maybe the played with the brim to offset the effect of a tall crown, or who knows what other possible modifications.

I think it is an important point to consider, if she is indeed a reliable witness; if the hat was indeed taller, perhaps its unblocked shape is taller than the height we assumed allowing for a deeper top center dent. -Just a thought.

As Dennis Miller says, "It's juts my opinion, and I could be wrong."

Scandinavia Jones · Post by **Scandinavia Jones** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 12:08 pm

Right you are, Feraud - Nadoolman was certainly affected by her time. In her other early 80's hat movie, The Blues Brothers, the crowns were considerably lower...

HJJr · Post by **HJJr** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 1:09 pm

Scandinavia Jones wrote:Right you are, Feraud - Nadoolman was certainly affected by her time. In her other early 80's hat movie, The Blues Brothers, the crowns were considerably lower...

Almost "pork pies" in fact.

Fedora · Post by **Fedora** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 1:33 pm

I have always been confused over the Swales version, and her version. They share nothing in common. Swales said that Speilberg and Ford came into the shop. Is there is anyway to logically make sense of what we know, to date? Australian model. Now, as someone else has said, most Aussie hats do not have the high crowns. But, the Poet does, or did. Fedora

Fedora · Post by **Fedora** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 1:40 pm

I've often assumed that Nadoolman spotted the hat and that Ford and Spielberg dropped in to check it out and try it on.

Now, that does make sense, and I never thought of that. I feel much better. Perhaps it can, and does make sense, and the two accounts can be reconciled. I mean, we have to take what she said as the truth. Fedora

Dakota Ellison · Post by **Dakota Ellison** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:10 pm

Was it something you said??

Oh god!!! Nah.......

3thoubucks · Post by **3thoubucks** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 5:27 pm

I'm really nervous about the tear drop theory, but I have to try and convince myself if I'm going to be buying new tear drop hats to experiment with. So here's what I'm trying to hear in the quote...She wants a hat that is "uniqe"- What's uniqe about a center dented open crown hat? A center dented tear drop- now that would be uniqe. If a Raiders top bash were put in a tear drop crown, the back of the bash would have to be be lowerd beyond the stock height, which would lower the over-all height of the hat, making a "little bit too high" hat just right. Someone pointed this out before- There doesn't seem to be any open crown Australian hats. She said "I had to have a hat.." twice in the quote. I don't think she wouldn't have bought the hat she saw that day. Ford and Speilberg may have bought another hat. The hat she bought may not have fit as well as the one Ford and Speilberg bought in person. Maybe they had to fold the sweat on the Nadoolman hat?

In any case, she SAT on this hat and twisted on it- I think she knows whether it was the Australian model she picked.

Bushman · Post by **Bushman** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 6:57 pm

Akubra Bushman, Squatter, and Sombrero are all available open-crowned.

Bushman

IndianaGuybrush · Post by **IndianaGuybrush** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 8:18 pm

Hemingway Jones wrote: It is a funny thing about Syntax, you can deconstruct what some one is saying and often find multiple meaning imbeded in their speech.

Oh nuts, and here I was thinking that once I graduated from college I would have escaped Jacques Derrida forever. Yet here he is haunting my hobbies!

Hemingway Jones · Post by **Hemingway Jones** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 9:04 pm

GuyBrush wrote:

Oh nuts, and here I was thinking that once I graduated from college I would have escaped Jacques Derrida forever. Yet here he is haunting my hobbies!

I hope we do not degenerate into total relativism. Then, we are truly lost!

Rob · Post by **Rob** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 9:18 pm

Bushman wrote:Akubra Bushman, Squatter, and Sombrero are all available open-crowned.

Bushman

And Akubra is not Australia's only hat maker, either - just the best known, both here and overseas.

Bushman · Post by **Bushman** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 9:30 pm

(Of course, perhaps there is an Aussie doppelganger for our own Fedora, somewhere in the outback boiling bodies in a billy.

. . . uh, hat bodies.)

IndianaGuybrush · Post by **IndianaGuybrush** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 9:49 pm

Hemingway Jones wrote:GuyBrush wrote:
Oh nuts, and here I was thinking that once I graduated from college I would have escaped Jacques Derrida forever. Yet here he is haunting my hobbies!
I hope we do not degenerate into total relativism. Then, we are truly lost!

Or found

IndyFrench · Post by **IndyFrench** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 11:01 pm

"So here's what I'm trying to hear in the quote..."

Umm.... Trying to hear? Hmm... As in, trying to convince yourself you're hearing something to conform to your new theory and justify the hat purchase?

I have no intention to insult you, 'bucks. I would merely like to point out that when you say you're trying to hear something, it generally means you didn't hear it naturally on the first few attempts and that a heavy dose of self-justification and "reading into it" may be involved.

Example: I believe that Obi-Wan didn't know about Leia, so when I hear Yoda say, "No, there is another." I hear it as Yoda revealing that to Obi-Wan. Others have argued that Obi-Wan knew about Leia and Yoda was simply reminding him, hence they hear Yoda's statement as a mere reminder.

Occam's Razor - The simplest solution is usually the truth. Obi-Wan is smart, why would Yoda have to remind him about something like that? Simple answer - Yoda wouldn't have to remind him. He simply didn't know.

The hat was unique from other period fedoras because of its high crown and wide brim, as evident on screen in the film. Simple answer - unique as meaning the high crown and wide brim Deborah mentions. Saying that unique means a low teardrop pushed up and bashed into a high crown, center dent is not only a little intricate thoughtwise, it's completely roundabout methodwise.

Deborah doubletalks in this interview - A unique hat that looks like every hat. Huh? It seems rather rhetorical and off the cuff to me. "The crown was a little too high." Sure it was, and that is evident in Raiders, even when compared with the other Indy films. No Bogie fedora I ever saw was that high or had a brim that wide! Hence, a unique hat.

On screen I can see the crown height. I see the brim width. I see the soft felt. I even saw the "turn" before I knew it was a turn. I always said, "His hat's on crooked." I never thought then his hat was bashed on the turn, though, as often the pinch is off center anyway in most scenes, but now I do see the possibility of it.

I see no evidence of a teardrop crown though. I watched Raiders today to look for it. I don't see it.

Respectfully and with regards,
Mike

3thoubucks · Post by **3thoubucks** » Mon Jan 31, 2005 2:52 am

Langpage...there ARE no iceicles in San Francisco. How can I stab you with one? I'm sure Fedora can reblock your Adventurebuilt into a tear drop for only a minimal charge.

............IndyFrench, I was admitting blind alegence to the teardrop. I've got to keep going in that direction untill I'm sure it's the truth or a falsehood.

Neolithic · Post by **Neolithic** » Mon Jan 31, 2005 3:00 am

I think Jabba the Hutt would like you, 3K... fearless and inventive...

3thoubucks · Post by **3thoubucks** » Mon Jan 31, 2005 3:46 am

I have a pet Fire-belly toad that looks like Jabba the Hut. It has never tried to bite me. ..He trusts me.. ......Hey Bushman, have you got a link to those open crowned Ausie hats? There's a trick to the shape of even an open crown Raiders hat, (As Fedora could attest). ... Just know that a tear drop with it's crown popped out does not look like an open crown Federation. I know the Banjo _ was named after an Australian poet and so was another Ausie hat. Is that what HJ means by "Poet"?

Puppetboy · Post by **Puppetboy** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 1:15 am

I thought I heard her say "Australiano" on the DVD. Am I wrong?

Here's another great theory: The "Australiano" was and still is a stock Cury hat with a wide brim and pre-blocked crown. Could this be the Cury connection? One thing is for sure - it was an "off the rack" hat. It would explain the dimensional cut ("can we take a little off the sides, perhaps?")

Food for thought...

Neolithic · Post by **Neolithic** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 1:32 am

thought I heard her say "Australiano" on the DVD. Am I wrong?

Here's another great theory: The "Australiano" was and still is a stock Cury hat with a wide brim and pre-blocked crown. Could this be the Cury connection? One thing is for sure - it was an "off the rack" hat. It would explain the dimensional cut ("can we take a little off the sides, perhaps?")

On what you're saying there, take a look at the bottom of this page:
http://maran.business.t-online.de/westernhat.htm

They have a model they call the 'Australiano' and a hat they claim as being the Indy hat... weird.

3thoubucks · Post by **3thoubucks** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 2:05 am

The search is over!! ...Or, maybe it is.. ....Nadoolman says "Austrailan" , but before the DVD interview, I always understood it to be the "Australiano" :!: . Wonder if Cury made this same model in 1981? Color looks right, no vent holes, ..maybe it's soft!?

Here's the Akubra that's coming to me..

The Akubra is said to have a 5 inch high crown. The "crocodile" leather band is 1/2 inch, so that seems believeable. Should be another 1/2 to 1 inch taller with the teardrop popped up. ....I'm excited about this... Watch the DVD..She says it had a "V-e-r-y wide brim" with a sense of wonder in her voice. She doesn't seem to to talking about 3 inches. She's talking about 4 inches in my opinion, like these... ...Soooo.... these, "couple of fittings" consisted of rolling the hat up and having multiple people sit on it?... Maybe they were mainly trying to diminish evidence of a previously block shaped hat! ...I bought this hat a couple weeks ago- http://www.villagehatshop.com/product1830.html No snap brim, yet it has quickly developed a glorious one, to my great surprise!

Dakota Ellison · Post by **Dakota Ellison** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:53 am

This model became famous. If you saw the Indiana-Jones-movies, this is the hat! And it is still produced in the same quality an on the same crowniron in the same manufacture as the original in the movie. Ask for the certificate! You can be ownere of this legend from 102.- $.

This was also on the page for Cury hats. The beat goes on.

3thoubucks · Post by **3thoubucks** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:59 am

Come on Dakota... Who said it was the "Austaliano"? I can't remember! I think that was valid, and I've always thought the Brazil connection was valid. So did Steve Delk... I saw that same hat with the same description on a site other than Cury's recently!... I understand your skeptisism. "Same "crowniron" ..An iron block?.....o.k. ...

Redbeard · Post by **Redbeard** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 6:50 am

What can we do to finally settle the Cury question. The question is as old as COW and really think it should be solved forever!

Regards,
Red

DanoSaurus · Post by **DanoSaurus** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 7:03 am

This model became famous. If you saw the Indiana-Jones-movies, this is the hat! And it is still produced in the same quality an on the same crowniron in the same manufacture as the original in the movie. Ask for the certificate! You can be ownere of this legend from 102.- $.

Okay, somebody ask for the "certificate"...I'd love to know what it says! Granted, it's not conclusive since anyone can type up a fairly convincing certificate of authenticity (assuming that's what they're talking about) but it could make for an interesting read and maybe a few laughs.

Redbeard · Post by **Redbeard** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 7:21 am

Fedora when you made contact with Cury, did you believe him? Could he proof his point?

Regards,
Red

Neolithic · Post by **Neolithic** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 7:55 am

And it is still produced in the same quality an on the same crowniron in the same manufacture as the original in the movie.

That's quite a claim! You don't see that claim every day.

Feraud · Post by **Feraud** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 9:06 am

Something else I keep in mind regarding her (or anyone) comments is the time/context they make them.

Nadoolman was making those comments in the present referring to her thoughts/actions in the past. I am not certain she had those standards in mind in 1980-81. That is not a critique of her at all! From her enthusiastic attitude I do believe that she loves her work and put her heart into it. The finished product certainly bears that out. Another part of my mind knows how hindsight is 20/20 vision.

Nadoolman is now speaking with the hindsight of what Raiders of the Lost Ark has become. Imagine this as an example. What if she took the job as an opportunity to work (because we all need to pay bills) and doing so selected a hat in a casual offhand manner while attending to a hundred other details. 10-20 years later the movie is a classic, and everyone wants to talk about "the hat". It is similar to fans on the street wanting Rober DeNiro to say, "you talking' to me?"......

What would you do if you were considered the person who created that look? Would you cut the interview short by telling people, "I don't remember picking it, I had more important details to attend to. Next question." Or would you give your opinions, which now contain 10-20 years of adulation and study, to a an attentive audience? Most of us are human, and might put on a good show.

Like I mentioned earlier in this post, it is plain to see this woman has talent and desire. I cannot help take other factors into consideration when wondering what X (hat) marks the spot.

Figuring out what someone intended in the past by their present comments can be a bit tricky...

Sorry for rambling, hope I made a little sense!

Fedora · Post by **Fedora** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 2:42 pm

Fedora when you made contact with Cury, did you believe him? Could he proof his point

Never could get a straight answer. But, after they sent me sample of felt, I knew I did not want to ever use what they make. And, most of this is in hindsight after learning what makes a good felt versus a low quality felt. I think they mix wool in with their felt, or at least it sure feels like it. Fedora

Fedora · Post by **Fedora** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 2:52 pm

Oh, I wanted to make another comment. It is gonna take hard evidence to convince me, that the Raiders hat was not the Poet, and was pre-creased. That makes sense, it is logical. That they used different felt suppliers over the years, is a given. But, I just do not think they bought the hats preblocked, premade, etc. They are afterall a hatter. Not just a hat retailer. Of course, it gives us something to do, to think about it, but for the life of me, I cannot see what is being talked about. If I could see it, then I could start thinking about it seriously. But, when all that I see is an HJ Poet, in a softer felt than the LC or TOD hat, with a little straighter block, it is hard to even consider a pre-formed crease. Why not just use the same crease? Why not make the hat look more traditional, and more like an American fedora? That this sort of crease, on the Raiders hat, was common in Britain, is the reason that it was used to start with. Fedora

3thoubucks · Post by **3thoubucks** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 4:27 pm

Fedora, What's this Akubra "Austrailan version" of yours 3/4 down this page with the vent holes? http://www.indygear.com/gear/fedora2.shtml Was that ever a pre formed hat? It's getting the signature "heart shape", the one Falstaf is trying to get. http://www.indygear.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11249

Post by **Ken** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 4:30 pm

Anyone any ideas how to get in touch with her? I conversation, it it were possible, could potentially clear up a few mysteries.

Ken

Post by **Michaelson** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 4:30 pm

It came open crown, and was only offered for a short period of time, then Akubra pulled it, as they didn't like the color. Fedora and I both had one at the time of that original posting. Regards. Michaelson

3thoubucks · Post by **3thoubucks** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 4:48 pm

Thanks Michaelson. Do you know the term "Australiano" came from?

Fedora · Post by **Fedora** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:29 pm

Fedora, What's this Akubra "Austrailan version" of yours 3/4 down this page with the vent holes?

That was the Bushman. I think. Gosh, it has been so long, that it is hard to recall. I never had any problem getting the heart shape from any hat. Akubra, Keppler, Miller, etc. You just drop the front down. If it tapers, put your hand inside, hold the hat in a non tapered configuration, and steam it to hold the non tapered sides, while keeping the front in the lower position. Just requires some tinkering. Fedora

Post by **Michaelson** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:35 pm

Yep, Bushman Featherweight. Regards. Michaelson

schwammy · Post by **schwammy** » Thu Feb 03, 2005 12:49 pm

3thoubucks wrote:So?????? ...At least I got "siloete" right.

We have a doctor from India where I work who pronounces it 'Sil-howty.'

Qabbe · Post by **Qabbe** » Thu Feb 03, 2005 1:44 pm

hmm...how often do you guys sit on your hat?

Post by **Michaelson** » Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:14 pm

In the 35 plus years I've been wearing fedoras, I can honestly say that I've never sat on one of my hats. Had one sat on once, but I was not the 'sitter'. Regards. Michaelson

Bufflehead Jones · Post by **Bufflehead Jones** » Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:29 pm

Qabbe wrote:hmm...how often do you guys sit on your hat?

Ohhhhhhh, he said "sit"......whew

Fedora · Post by **Fedora** » Thu Feb 03, 2005 3:27 pm

In the 35 plus years I've been wearing fedoras, I can honestly say that I've never sat on one of my hats. Had one sat on once, but I was not the 'sitter'. Regards. Michaelson

You know, me either, but since I started making hats, if someone wants a Cairo style, I have got pretty good at drop kicking the hats, playing fetch with the dog, and throwing them out of fast moving cars when there is a semi behind me.

OK, ok, just joking about that. All of it, so as not to scare anyone off. Fedora