The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

[Canada Jones]

I think I need to hang out in the fedora section more often. All the perspectives raised - Mark, Steve, Canada, Mike and myself and others - result in some interesting intersections of data as well as voids where I see possibilities for what otherwise might be discounted. Yes, even the most wildly elaborate fiction contains truth. I appreciate the pragmatism that's been used and the acceptance of new ideas.

Kudos, my friends....

Yes, you should hang out here more. You always bring interesting material to the table.

[binkmeisterRick]

Besides, _, we need to get you a better fitting hat.

[Long John Tinfoil]

Really enjoying this thread. Also enjoying the degree of civility. Kudos to all.

_, when are you going to take on the Guns & Holsters issues?

LJ

[Hollowpond]

With all these revelations, it makes me really wonder if the turn was intentional. I have always wondered that anyways, but everytime I bring it up I have to do this or this . It has been a very popular opinion in these parts that DN was responsible for every single nuance of that hat. Now we're learning (as I best understand it) that she basically had nothing to do with it. Where does that leave the turn?

Travis

[jnicktem]

Where does that leave the turn?

In the hands of Steven and Harrison.

[Hollowpond]

Where does that leave the turn?

In the hands of Steven and Harrison.

I thought that SS didn't like the Raiders hats that were first submitted for CS. Or maybe that was just the continuity thing. I still say that the turn could have been completely accidental. Even still, it seems unlikely we would receive evidence one way or the other.

Travis

[jnicktem]

That was discussed in this thread a little earlier. Apparently Steve was looking for continuity after LC. He never said (to Steve at least) that he didn't like the Raiders fedora... it just wasn't what he wanted for CS.

[Hollowpond]

Yeah, that's why I mentioned the continuity thing. I still maintain that the turn could have, that is could have been accidental.

Travis

[Canada Jones]

I am still somewhat puzzled though, over Deborah's real involvment with "the hat". Someone, and I have to take it to be S. S. decided on the dimensional cut(being a director with knowledge of camera angles, and such) , and had the ribbon changed out. From the stock wide Poet default ribbon, to the 39mm dark brown ribbon. They then recieved the hat open crown, going by what he told _.

Having read this and other posts of yours, I think you are on to something Fedora. I think Deborah found the HJ hat shop and visited it. _ wrote:
I think there is room for her having found HJ and having talked to them about what was wanted. She very well may have told Steven about the shop. This makes sense. It would make logical sense that she had a good idea of what a good hat shop might be. I think she looked at hats and picked one that she thought would work since the hat was based on Secret of the Incas. Again from Raiders.Net interview:

"Raiders stands on it’s own as a modern classic, but the fedora jacket and whip are right there on Charlton Heston in 1954. My own work is not diminished by having seen that marvellous film. The spirit of Raiders was also informed by Alan Ladd’s 1940’s film noirs, which also had the same hard boiled adventurer, clad in leather jacket and felt fedora.

I have just seen Secret of the Incas again at the Eastman House in Rochester, and it really helped refresh my memory... Heston’s fedora is considerably bigger and more unwieldy – compared to the one I designed for Indiana it looks practically like a picture hat!"

Perhaps she even ordered one or the 5 SS picked up and paid for. It sounds like SS and HF only went to HJ once to pick up the hat. Here is a question - does HJ offer the kind of service where they can change the ribbon while you wait? It sounds like you can cut the brim while you wait but the ribbon seems like it would take more time. Especially if you are buying 5 hats. Would someone as important as HF or SS stand around? If they ordered the changes I would guess they would send a production person around to pick them up later. What seems plausible to me is that Deborah checked out the hats and ordered them. Because of SS lack of confidence in her he wanted to see them for himself and went to the shop with HF. I have read a number of places that she decided on the color palette for Indy - earth tones. Again from Raiders.net:

"The palette for Indiana Jones is all earth tones – even in his archelogical academic wear. This was my deliberate choice – Indiana was accessible, magnetic, and above all – part of the earth he was always digging in. The bad guys in Raiders are in tones of grey and black – cold and repellent"

While I could see SS or Deborah ordering the brim to be cut smaller (which it has been established that this can be done while you wait) which actually makes sense if the hat is used in a movie, the color of ribbon sounds to me more like a costume designer who had picked earth tones for her hero. Oh, and the size of the ribbon also sounds like something a costume designer would be interested in and possibly the turn, unless this was something Swales added thinking it might refine the look. While Deborah may have been preoccupied with her wedding I don't think would negate her skills as a designer. SS had, after all worked with her before and felt good enough about her work to bring her on board for Indy so he must have had confidence in her at some point (ie. if she was a horrible designer then she would have never worked with him again). I had read much of Deborah's written work and found it well thought out, intelligent and insightful. She did afterall get nominated for an Academy Award as well as serve as the President of the Costume Designers Guild so it is not like she cannot design.

SO. What about this scenario:

Deborah buys the Aussie model from Morgan and SS clearly rejects it. He says to her something like "No, this is not what we want - Think Secret of the Incas". By now she is in London and has to use a British shop. Again, no internet at this point in history so she is more limited in her choices plus the time problem. So she goes to HJ and orders the Poet, which is a large brimmed hat - From the pics I have seen of them - perhaps one of larger brimmed hats that HJ sells but someone else will have to confirm that. She buys the poet because in her mind she has the image of the Secret of the incas hat is quite a large Brim and that is what SS wanted. She asks for the ribbon to be changed because of her clear intention to emphasis the earth tones of Indy. I do not think Deborah was responsible for the turn and have heard her mention she was not aware of what that was. I think that was a Swales thing. perhaps as she spoke to him she is telling him about the movie and the era and he has this idea to turn the hat to change the shape of the brim. So she agrees and leaves. SS, who had limited or no confidence in her, insists on seeing the hat, so he goes with HF to see how it fits and to pick up the hats. When he gets there he sees the brim is huge - yes very much Secret of the Incas but it makes it too tough to light. In talking to Swales, Swales suggests a dimensionally cut brim, which SS agrees to. Cutting the sides off will allow more light onto the face (if I correctly understand what a dimensionally cut brim is). This is done in front of HF and SS and would be something they would wait for because SS and HF would want to see what it looked like on his head. They then buy the hats and leave to bash them. Of course, what does not fit correctly here is that if SS did not have confidence in her why would he let her order the hats without him first seeing them. I think for a number of reasons - it was almost 30 years ago, because so much of her focus was on her wedding and because she was buying all kinds of other costumes for this movie at the same time, Deborah has got some of the details mixed up. I think she remembers something about the Aussie hat but has it mixed up with what she actually bought at HJ and so when asked about the model only the Aussie name pops up (which makes perfect sense if she did not actually buy them and see a bill with the proper name of Poet).

Another question in this is that she has claimed to have bought ten will SS only bought 4 which seems like it is not enough for all the stunt people or the doubles. Are there invoices somewhere for the hats for the stunt doubles? Perhaps she went back and bought 10 for them and has that mixed up as well although your point earlier in this thread _, and thanks for responding to that, is that if no receipt was submitted then no on ewould have gotten paid makes sense and if I were her I would make sure I got my money if I had to put them on my visa card.

Speaking to your point Fedora about the chaos of preproduction, I am sure it was worse in the eighties when things like cell phones and email were just a dream so it would mean more running around trying to get things done.
best
Canada

[Long John Tinfoil]

Maybe the "turn" also had to do with lighting originally. Done for an early scene to get a particular effect and then kept either for continuity or because they liked it.

LJ

[Indiana Bugs]

I think the turn was done, most likely through error-and-realization, by Ford in between takes, or in between scenes. I think he was just playing with the hat (none of us ever do that, right?) and between him doing it, and Steven liking what he saw, it was left that way, perhaps with the pinch realigned after the swoop of the brim was 'approved.' I also think that the possible primary motivation for using the brim swoop was not just to look 'good' or cool,' but to make the hat look very lived in, considering what IJ does, and had done in his earlier life, while wearing it. Just conjecture on my part, but I like the way it sounds.

[Scott63]

Isn't it more likely that the turn is evidence of two amateurs bashing the lid? I mean - to a non-expert like me - it just seems like a mistake. Jmo...

Personally, I think that’s exactly the story behind “the turn”. I grew up wearing cowboy hats - shaping and reshaping them using a tea kettle on the stove, and most of the time I’d end up with the hat off-center. I always figured it was a combination of my poor bashing skills and long oval head shape.

Scott

[Michaelson]

The 'turn' has always reminded me of an old story told in many of our engineering classes about traditions formed by uninformed practices.

A young girl watched her Mother make a pot roast for dinner, and watch her Mom cut the end off the roast before putting in the pot.

"Why did you do that Mom?"

"That's the way grandma taught me", her Mom said.

"Well, why did SHE do it?

"I don't know! Let's ask her!" her Mother replied.

They called grandma at her house.

"Grandma", asked the Mother," why did you cut the end off a pot roast before you put in the post?"

"That how MY mom used to do it. Call her."

They called great grandma at the nursing home and asked her.

"Oh honey", said great grandma,"I just did that because we didn't HAVE a pot big enough to put a pot roast in, so I just got in the habit of cutting the end off before putting in a ANY pot, and did it out of habit after that."

Ford proably just twisted the hat tightly on his head due to the wind or out of habit to make it fit tighter due to stretching in the heat from perspiration, and we've been collectively having that turn installed on OUR hats because it's not become 'tradition'.

Regard! Michaelson

[Indiego Jones]

IMO, the turn was born due to the fact that the caracter should have his fedora on, all the time. Very difficult, considering all action scenes involved in the movie.
So, maybe some stunt suggested an old trick: just turn the hat a bit, and it will stay on.

[Fedora]

You're kidding me? It's from a thread you started!

Just wait until you get old Erri. You will understand... I sat here shocked when I read the prior post about the bleach! I absolutely had no recollection of that! I think I may be just about 1/2 brain dead these days.

Great stuff here by the way. Michaelson, didn't mean to ignore your posts. I was just keying in on _ at the time, as I was trying to get back to the shop. Then I got so busy I could not return, until this morning.

The theories on the turn are the best I have seen. I like the one about the hat being tightened up by the turn, as well as amateurs creasing the hats off center. Makes alot of good sense.

I am curious about the 5 hats though. They had what, 3 stunt men? If they each got a hat, that leaves only one for Ford! And he got that one hat wet! Saturated, unsuable. Fedora

[Erri]

Probably that was the first order... then they ordered more but _ might have seen only the first receipt. Unless they were really only 4 hats! That would explain why the cairo hat looks "patched-up" as best as they could. Maybe that's all they had and they couldn't afford to get more or couldn't get more in time.
Although I remember someone in the past posted some list of hats used in Raiders, I don't know if it was legit or not.

And he got that one hat wet! Saturated, unsuable. Fedora

We can't be sure of that, in the "chase" he wore a mock-up jacket and nobody noticed it. We may suppose that he could have also worn a mock-up hat when he jumped in the river.
The scene in which he jumps in the water is not a close up, could have had anything on his head. Even if he did have a HJ in that scene, they could have subsituted the hat in the next cutscene when he emerges with a completely floppy wet hat (while the real HJ would have only got a bit wet).

[Fedora]

We can't be sure of that, in the "chase" he wore a mock-up jacket and nobody noticed it. We may suppose that he could have also worn a mock-up hat when he jumped in the river

No he was wearing a real hat. A closeup enhanced photo here a few years ago, showed the hat clearer, and it had the ribbon and everything on it. I thought this may have been used in the cockpit scene in TOD, the distressed looking, tapered hat he wore in that scene. But who knows?

Also, if the hats were ordered and picked up later on, they may have billed it to the company instead of using their own credit cards. It just seems to me these 4 brown hats and one gray one, were not enough to make this film. Of course, those may have been Harrison's personal hats too. I could see 5 lasting through the film. Didn't we once have an account of Swales telling us the number? Can't trust my own memory now!

I already was fairly certain of the gray hat actually existing, due to what Bernie said when he mentioned a gray travel hat, in Oxford Gray for Indy 4. That convinced me of its existence.

I think _'s info has added a new dimension to the Raiders fedora story. And once again thanks man, as I know you are a jacket guy with little interest in the hats. You sure gave some of us something worth posting about. We need a bit of salt from time to time. Fedora

[Hollowpond]

Isn't it more likely that the turn is evidence of two amateurs bashing the lid? I mean - to a non-expert like me - it just seems like a mistake. Jmo...

That's what I was getting at.

Travis

[Fedora]

Isn't it more likely that the turn is evidence of two amateurs bashing the lid? I mean - to a non-expert like me - it just seems like a mistake. Jmo...

Plus, if anyone remembers just how soft the Optimo rabbit hats were, it is so easy to put the hat on crooked. You can't tell it, due to the softeness. If the hat was put on open crown, and then creased, which would be a no nonsense way of doing it, and the hat was turned a bit......well, you get my point.

Also when working with Bernie on Indy 4, I don't recall him saying SS did not want the Raiders fedora, but was speaking of himself at the time. He didn't like it. Then later on, I saw he was seeking continuity with TLC. So, it made sense why he discounted the Raiders fedora earlier. And I think this may have been the reason he chose the other blocked hat I had sent in as a sample. We kept calling our other samples hats, Raider blocked hats. He may have wanted to get away from anything with Raiders on it!

_'s info has opened the door to even more speculation. The story of the HJ Aussie hat, used as a prototype now seems to be questionable. But what an elaborate story from D.L. I just wonder if it was possible that she had already visited HJ, prior to SS and HF going there? When the last 5 were paid for, by SS, I wonder if these are what D.N. had spec'd out prior? Or do we just need to totally discount her story about her visit to HJ and the HJ Aussie prototype? Seems like she would have had to have bought that Aussie hat from HJ, before they cut it down, etc....But _ has no paperwork to back this up. And, if folks pay out of their own pocket, they do expect to get reinburshed! Unless of course, she had an account that HJ would bill to. Surely not all of the costume was paid for with credit cards. I wonder if _ has the entire costumer paper work, i.e. charges and receipts? Fedora

[Digger4Glory]

One thing is for certain. If the director did not want the turned look, he would not have had it. So if the turn was a mistake, a hollywood trick, done on purpose to add character or just to keep the hat on for physical acting, it is the Raiders look once the director says print. It is really cool trying to figure out what actually was the deal with it though...

[jnicktem]

_'s info has opened the door to even more speculation. The story of the HJ Aussie hat, used as a prototype now seems to be questionable. But what an elaborate story from D.L. I just wonder if it was possible that she had already visited HJ, prior to SS and HF going there? When the last 5 were paid for, by SS, I wonder if these are what D.N. had spec'd out prior? Or do we just need to totally discount her story about her visit to HJ and the HJ Aussie prototype? Seems like she would have had to have bought that Aussie hat from HJ, before they cut it down, etc....But _ has no paperwork to back this up. And, if folks pay out of their own pocket, they do expect to get reinburshed! Unless of course, she had an account that HJ would bill to. Surely not all of the costume was paid for with credit cards. I wonder if _ has the entire costumer paper work, i.e. charges and receipts? Fedora

To me, I think it is VERY plausible that D. N. forgot that she bought the Aussie hat from David Morgan and assumed that it was an HJ since that is what was used in the film.

[Canada Jones]

Ford proably just twisted the hat tightly on his head due to the wind or out of habit to make it fit tighter due to stretching in the heat from perspiration, and we've been collectively having that turn installed on OUR hats because it's not become 'tradition'.

Regard! Michaelson

I think this is correct. I am sure Deborah had nothing to do with the turn. I was reading Fedora's post about guy he sent the hat to with the turn and the guy complaining because it looked wrong. I would think this would be the case for all non hat people? I mean, who actually orders a turned hat and why would they? In thinking this through, a guy like Swales, who makes hats for royalty and who is asked to make a movie hat is not going to make it off center right because it, well, looks wrong. He would have to have been asked but then again, who would know enough to ask? I met Swales years ago (thanks to Michaelson's tip that HJ made the hats!) and one thing I know about the British is that they can be very proper - especially those with Royal Warrants over their door. The shop I went in to was immaculate and everything in its place. Hardly the place that would hand out hats with turns. If only a few hats were ordered (for budget reasons perhaps) then it would seem that those hats would be used more and since it was an action movie the hat needed to fit tight. I am sure when HF was fitted, he was probably fitted like anyone would be fitted when they bought a casual hat. One thing that impressed me with Fedora, is that when I bought my first AB I gave him the measurement of my head and he said he would make it a little larger to allow for the heat shrinkage. And you know what? The hat is incredibly comfortable for everyday wear but I would not want to go horse back riding with it because I think it would fly off. So yes, I could totally see HF twisting the hat to keep it on his head. Further proof of this would be if we could find evidence of a non turned hat (because you would think at some point when the hat was new there would have been no turn right?). If you were rotating between 4 different hats you would also think that the ones worn more would have the turn and the ones worn less would not.

Good work Michaelson. That is one of the great thing about getting info from people that wear these hats!
best
Canada

[Canada Jones]

The scene in which he jumps in the water is not a close up, could have had anything on his head.

Maybe he was actually wearing the Aussie Hat Deborah bought from Morgan! I believe it came with a chin strap and side holes to let the water out! Wouldn't that be funny if true...

Plus, if anyone remembers just how soft the Optimo rabbit hats were, it is so easy to put the hat on crooked. You can't tell it, due to the softeness. If the hat was put on open crown, and then creased, which would be a no nonsense way of doing it, and the hat was turned a bit......well, you get my point.

But what an elaborate story from D.L. I just wonder if it was possible that she had already visited HJ, prior to SS and HF going there? When the last 5 were paid for, by SS, I wonder if these are what D.N. had spec'd out prior? Or do we just need to totally discount her story about her visit to HJ and the HJ Aussie prototype?

For me, I do not believe that Deborah is deliberately lying or deliberately making stuff up. I think she is mixing up the details and stating them as fact. Very much like Fedora not at all remembering the post about the bleached hat. Raiders was almost 30 years ago and I am sure her memory has faded and blended things together. So, to me, her confusion is understandable. As the costume designer for so many films her mind must be full of thousands of little details and as I said in another post - she had her wedding on her mind at this point which would throw anyone off. She has done enough other notable costumes - Blues Brothers, Thriller, Animal House - plus she has a PhD in this, for me to believe she is credible as a person. Confused but credible. And I should say, having heard her speak and listened to her being interviewed she strikes me as a confident person wno speaks with authority. I think she vaguely remembers something about the Aussie model and her mind has put that with the HJ hats and that is what she has been saying for years. Once you say something enough times it becomes even more real to you. Having said that I do think though, that she did go to HJ and either order or buy some hats. Again, she could have misremembered 10 or perhaps as said in another post, she may have ordered 10 for the stunt people right? (She did order 10 Jackets from Wilsons for Tom Selleck so perhaps that is where she remembers the number 10 from).SS may have said - here is the hat - get me 10 more for the stunt people and double. Or she may have gone and ordered 10 and when SS got there, for budget reasons he only bought 5 and felt he could get along with that. I remember reading about the hat that is owned by the guy from Screen Used. He tells how the stuntman grabbed the hat from a box of them and they let him have it. My thought on this is that if you were trying to get through the film with only 4 hats you would certainly not give one away would you?

I am still not sure where her memories of fitting HF fit though. She clearly stated, on numerous occassions that she fitted the hat to his face because as a costume designer that is what one does. If Kelly did the fitting then why would Deborah remember it as if she was there? Any chance she fitted the hat (that SS bought) to Ford on the set? Again, I do believe _ when he mention HF stating she was not there during the fitting. Perhaps that will have to remain a mystery.

Fedora - your point about the softness of the rabbit fur is also, I believe, on mark. Thanks for this insight. As has been said before - this is great stuff. Seems like the turn was something done for practical purposes and not because it was deliberately designed that way. One last thought on that - why were the other hats not turned as well - perhaps they bought a smaller size for the other movies to help the hat stay on?
best
Canada

PS Do we know if George Lucas had any input on how the hat looked?

[darthjones]

Hey, gang -

I may have mentioned it before but Swales told me at the shop that "they sprayed (diluted) bleach to it, you know, not pure, but in a spray bottle."

So he didn't say that he himself did it but he may have meant that it was requested of him, who knows. But he did say the Raiders hats had diluted bleach sprayed on.

Somewhere a ways back I posted an old HJ I had done that too - the color looked great afterwards too but that hat is long gone and shredded just about.

[Erri]

Thanks darthjones for popping in. Sounds like Swales got an "insight" of the distress work the costume department was applying to his hats. Now it's clear that he didn't do it himself, he just knew that the costume dept. had done some bleaching job.
It all fits again thanks

[BendingOak]

Do you hear that...............the sounds of spray bottles.

[BendingOak]

The thing that doesn't add up ( and there is a lot) is the DVD with D.L. telling her story. Why would G. L. and S.S. let that be on the DVD's? It would be real easy to use some CGI and remove her with someone else or change the story. They do it all the time.

[Fedora]

I may have mentioned it before but Swales told me at the shop that "they sprayed (diluted) bleach to it, you know, not pure, but in a spray bottle."

So he didn't say that he himself did it but he may have meant that it was requested of him, who knows. But he did say the Raiders hats had diluted bleach sprayed on.

To lighten up a felt's color, bleach can be used. But, bleach is also a big enemy to anything made of fur. It does nasty things to it. Although a weakened mixture might be ok. If bleach was added, they were probably trying to get the brown hat lighter in color, unless it was used for distressing.

If it was done to lighten up the sable brown, then sable isn't really the right color! It would have to be a sable with bleach added. Fedora

[Hollowpond]

Do you hear that...............the sounds of spray bottles.

Travis

[BendingOak]

Do you hear that...............the sounds of spray bottles.

Travis

I'm glade someone got it.

[BendingOak]

The thing that doesn't add up ( and there is a lot) is the DVD with D.L. telling her story. Why would G. L. and S.S. let that be on the DVD's? It would be real easy to use some CGI and remove her with someone else or change the story. They do it all the time.

it's a valid point and a good question. I've not asked, but I've seen instances where I think I can draw a paralell.

There are places where brutal honesty and public floggings are not appropriate, and in the DVD where the theme is a celebration of the franchise? Not a place to air laundry. And Steven and George have been trying to recover from the extraordinary bad press and image they received from frying the Russian dancer in CS. Plus, she's Landis' wife and he is a force.

I struggle with what I still consider a two-faced approach. But I see it a lot. Now to connect to the points made here on her performance? I initially got the info from her assistant, Noel, Monty, and Ian. What's Steven going to say when I tell him Kelly's already told me they were getting their butts kicked for her screwing up? Or Harrison telling me she was not showing up at the fitting at B&N for the jacket? He's gonna put on the honest "I as frustrated as ####" face.

But, BO, your point is one I ask as well. I had never watched the interview until after I wrote the initial post here.

It's one thing to air out stuff in public and I agree with you on that. It's another thing to put it on the DVD. Just leaver her interview out. How would that be bad press or public flogging.

Also, as you stated. "two-faced approached." How can we take some ones opinion or account of what went on 30 years ago on a bad break up. I'm not saying anyone is lying but when people break up things get twisted.


On a side not Dancer got fried in CS? Was I asleep?

[Hollowpond]

Do you hear that...............the sounds of spray bottles.

Travis

I'm glade someone got it.

And the reason that is so dang funny is because its true. We know ourselves all too well. I would love to know how many gear heads had the thought, "Hey...I've got some bleach " when they read this!

The thing that doesn't add up ( and there is a lot) is the DVD with D.L. telling her story. Why would G. L. and S.S. let that be on the DVD's? It would be real easy to use some CGI and remove her with someone else or change the story. They do it all the time.

it's a valid point and a good question. I've not asked, but I've seen instances where I think I can draw a paralell.

There are places where brutal honesty and public floggings are not appropriate, and in the DVD where the theme is a celebration of the franchise? Not a place to air laundry. And Steven and George have been trying to recover from the extraordinary bad press and image they received from frying the Russian dancer in CS. Plus, she's Landis' wife and he is a force.

I struggle with what I still consider a two-faced approach. But I see it a lot. Now to connect to the points made here on her performance? I initially got the info from her assistant, Noel, Monty, and Ian. What's Steven going to say when I tell him Kelly's already told me they were getting their butts kicked for her screwing up? Or Harrison telling me she was not showing up at the fitting at B&N for the jacket? He's gonna put on the honest "I as frustrated as ####" face.

But, BO, your point is one I ask as well. I had never watched the interview until after I wrote the initial post here.

It's one thing to air out stuff in public and I agree with you on that. It's another thing to put it on the DVD. Just leaver her interview out. How would that be bad press or public flogging.

Also, as you stated. "two-faced approached." How can we take some ones opinion or account of what went on 30 years ago on a bad break up. I'm not saying anyone is lying but when people break up things get twisted.


On a side not Dancer got fried in CS? Was I asleep?

Yup. I'm with you on both points. I think we will never know what really happened. Oh well, at least we got some kick-A hatters that can give me a hat that is so close to SA, only Indy's hairdresser knows for sure. And as for point two, Dancer? What the what?

Travis

[IndianaSean]

Oh my god....After reading all three pages straight through my brain is MUSH!! So much detail. Thank you all for info. I would love to see the face of an outsider peaking in on these topics and see the level of detail in each post!!

Do you think we really have to much time on our hands?? I say this in jest.


High Regards,
Sean

[Fedora]

I IMed Steven asking about a hat Deb would have presented. "It was more like an Australian Cowboy hat. It was too tall, too wide, had a chin strap and eyelets in the side and it could not be modified!!! We threw it out and Deb had nothing more to do with the hat or anything else beyond that point. I took Harrison shopping and we went to that shop you named. Harrison and I worked on the look and changed the hat's shape using hot water, and wash cloth and a steam iron. That was the advice given to us by the guy working at the hat shop."

You know, I read this again and it seems to me that D.N. had nothing to do with this hat. Yet she supposedly had the hat in France. And the hat she had wouild have been the one used in the film. When SS said the hat she brought to him had a chin strap and eyelets, this matches exactly what she told in an interview about the Aussie hat at HJ. But in that interview she said they modified it, shortened the crown perhaps and cut down the brim. Yet, it seems going by what Steven says, she just brought that hat with her. Unmodified! Which he chunked! And then SS and Ford got a hat, and worked on it to create the first Indy fedora.

We have been barking up the wrong tree for years! As far as I can concerned, our common knowledge was a pipe dream. And I think we can throw out everything she has said about this hat.

SS story jives with Swales story. And 2 out of 3 is pretty convincing, especially when one of the two was the directior of the film. So D.N. took credit where it wasn't due, and SS appears charitable enough to allow it. I can believe that fully.

This clears up alot about bespoke hats, etc. The truth seems to be that HJ had the Poet of that era in stock, SS bought one, and later 5 more. This would make Swales as being completely truthful in that he used a Poet, for all of the films. This makes for a much simpler story, and to me, a bit more credible too.

So why was the Raiders fedora not tapered like many of the TOD fedoras? That is easy to explain. As they have done a few times in the past couple decades, HJ just changed their suppliers of the Poet. They used another factory, which used a different block shape to make the TOD and TLC fedoras. The old factory that made the Raiders fedora, may have went belly up. Many factories did in that era. South Africa being one of them. It very well could be that the South Africa factory made the Raiders fedora and then ceased to exist before TOD. When Swales told someone he thought the hat came from South America, he may have meant South Africa! It may have been his British accent that caused this confusion. Or he may have misspoke.

But a clue to the change of factory deal would be the way the sweat is attached to the felt. On the Raiders fedora we cannot see the stitching, which means it was put farther up from the brim break. Hard to see this on the TOD fedora but we can clearly see on TLC fedora, the brim break stitches that hold in the sweat. This one clue tells me that a different factory made the Raiders fedora. It is like a fingerprint. Only a few factories today, use brim break stitches, and really, only one that I know of. And that is the one that makes the HJ and the Christy today. Others seem to sew the sweat in above the brim break. IN fact, the majority of others. This tells me that the current factory HJ uses may have made the LC fedora, but definitely not the Raiders. Wrong finger prints. Fedora

[Hollowpond]

I no longer take it as an insult. It is simply an example of limited thinking.

Or possibly the fact that I just don't care as much as some people. Whether DN or SS or GL or HF or John Brown did it, I just am glad that they did . Don't get me wrong, this information is incredibly interesting, and it does certainly seem to point to SS and HF MUCH more than DN. But in the end this is just a soap opera to me. In the end, I don't care who did it...just that they did. I have found obsessing too much over this (or anything for that matter) leads to a certain level of dissatisfaction with the object being obsessed over.

Travis

[IndianaSean]

I no longer take it as an insult. It is simply an example of limited thinking.

Or possibly the fact that I just don't care as much as some people. Whether DN or SS or GL or HF or John Brown did it, I just am glad that they did . Don't get me wrong, this information is incredibly interesting, and it does certainly seem to point to SS and HF MUCH more than DN. But in the end this is just a soap opera to me. In the end, I don't care who did it...just that they did. I have found obsessing too much over this (or anything for that matter) leads to a certain level of dissatisfaction with the object being obsessed over.

Travis

Agreed!

Sean

[Bufflehead Jones]

A few things to think about:

First, the truth is a cumulation of perspectives.

Peoples answer to a question will vary depending on the context and the audience.

If you look for the real story, it comes from several truths. As such, there will be contradictions.

You have the facts. With all due respect, it is your interpretation that is lacking.

People are not consistant across settings. They simply are not. Believing this to be a flaw in the facts is due to two dimensional thinking. It assumes that we always consider everything around us, everything that has proceeded us, and it presumes that everyone thinks and perceives the same way. None of these things are valid.

Just this last week I had somebody invite me into their LinkedIn network. He was an employee of mine. In his invitation, he also waxed on about how great it was to work together. The thing is? I fired him. In fact, it was probably the bloodiest firing I've ever had to do.

People remember what they can handle to remember.

Bosses only air the bad things about the people that work for them in the right setting. I got the story I got because Steven knew what I needed it for. But in other settings, it is not going to be the same. Again the DVD is a celebration. Also, talking publically about the screw-ups that happen underneath you reflects badly on you. First for airing it and scone for having hired the screw-up.

This is the danger to me of providing y'all with "truth" in the form of hard facts. You tend to think all you need to do is line 'em up. When it foes not make sime sense, you say "I'm not calling anybody a liar, but I don't think we will ever know the true story.

I no longer take it as an insult. It is simply an example of limited thinking.

That is a good point, _. In regards to my line of work, many people (especially those that watch too many crime shows on tv) believe that an eyewitness is crucial in sucessfully prosecuting a case. Not so fast my friends. Check out this quote from Criminal Investigation, sixth edition.

"Eyewitness identification and description is regarded as the most unreliable form of evidence and causes more miscarriages of justice than any other method of proof.

Research and courtroom experience provide ample evidence that an eyewitness to a crime is being asked to be something and do something that a normal human being was not created to be or do. Human perception is sloppy and uneven."

Isn't what we are doing here, like investigating a crime that occurred 30 years ago? The point was already made that _'s "interview" of DL was more like an "interogation". In trying to piece together the story of the Raiders fedora, you will have to decide how reliable each witness' recollection is, the competence of both witnesses and physical evidence, and you will have to decide how much weight you give each piece of evidence as it is presented.

Because some stories may not match, doesn't necessarily mean that someone is lying. It doesn't mean that someone is a bad person. Perceptions are different, sometimes they may not be talking about the same thing or the same time, and memory fades. Heck, at my age, I don't remember what I did yesterday, so don't ask.

Will we ever know the whole story about this hat? Maybe, but more than likely, maybe not. It is the basis for a fascinating conversation.

Now, about those people that watch too many crime shows on tv. They are also the ones that expect all hairs and fibers to be collected and sent to the FBI's lab, and molds taken for all the footprints and tire tracks, and tool mark samples taken, photographs, any fingerprints collected, a canvas of the neighborhood, and anything else they can think of, to investigate the case of their favorite petunia that got stolen out of their flower bed. I got news for 'ya, unless one or more people were killed in the theft of said petunia, that ain't gonna happen.

[Long John Tinfoil]

So is it possible for someone to search the varioius makers that went belly-up in that period, determine who was the supplier and then, depending on where it was, can someone try to track down a block?

This could almost become an Indy adventure, doing the research, collecting and sifting through the (probably fragmentary) evidence, and then searching for the lost artifact. Maybe it's in a landfill somewhere, or maybe it went to another firm in a dispersal sale, maybe an employee snagged the blocks with the intent of starting their own business, or maybe the blocks are sitting in an abandoned building gathering dust.

A VERY tall order, I know, but what a thing to find!

LJ

[BendingOak]

I no longer take it as an insult. It is simply an example of limited thinking.

I hope no one takes this statement as insulting.


Just because someone doesn't take your word for 100% truth and fact right away doesn't mean they have limited thinking. You have some pieces to the puzzle and you put them together. A some of these things don't add up. What we have here is pieces of the puzzle not the whole puzzle. Nor do all of the pieces we have lock up real well.

[Erri]

The thing that doesn't add up ( and there is a lot) is the DVD with D.L. telling her story. Why would G. L. and S.S. let that be on the DVD's? It would be real easy to use some CGI and remove her with someone else or change the story. They do it all the time.

It's my personal belief that DVD contents and features are produced and handled by the distributor/producer company, not the director or the writer of the film. Also I have doubts Spielberg even has the time to watch all the DVD special features of films he directed. George Lucas wouldn't even know who made what, I don't think he took a great part in the costume department and surely didn't deal with Nadoolman.

If bleach was added, they were probably trying to get the brown hat lighter in color, unless it was used for distressing.

It was not for changing the hat colour but for the distress around the ribbon area, it can be noticed in the Cairo scenes. That stuff that has been said for years that it was just sweat through the felt it's actually the bleach sprayed alla round the ribbon. A couple of members here (one is darthjones another is an ex member) attempted the bleaching work with very very good results.
Although screen accurate I would also avoid bleach treatment to a felt hat.

[Erri]

So is it possible for someone to search the varioius makers that went belly-up in that period, determine who was the supplier and then, depending on where it was, can someone try to track down a block?

The name of the factory is maybe easier to find than the relocation of their material since their closure!

[Hollowpond]

Hmmmm... I gotta say my worst choice of wording today was "limited thinking." it implies something I did not intend to convey. Mea culpa.

Say 5 Our Delks, and 7 Hail Nowaks, and you shall be forgiven my son.

Travis

[whiskyman]

I find the mention of David Morgan fascinating! As far as i understand it, Morgan only provided whips for the sequels and not for Raiders. For Raiders, they apparently used Morgan whips already owned by Glen Randall. So DN bought a hat to be used for Indy from the guy that made all his whips - without even knowing it!?! Even if Morgan did provide whips for Raiders, I think it would have been later on - at least based on what I've read over the years. Of all the people to choose a hat from!

[BendingOak]

I try and keep a open mind to all things but I'm not going to throw things out so easy either. I never carved anything in stone or owned it as fact when it comes to the Raiders hat. I know people tell me that I will die one day just like everyone else but I don't totally believe it. When it happens, I believe.

[Erri]

And gents - films like 1941? They just don't count because then they didn't count in the Real Hollywood.

Films like 1941 don't count anywhere anyway

[Indiana Bugs]

So is it possible for someone to search the varioius makers that went belly-up in that period, determine who was the supplier and then, depending on where it was, can someone try to track down a block?

This could almost become an Indy adventure, doing the research, collecting and sifting through the (probably fragmentary) evidence, and then searching for the lost artifact. Maybe it's in a landfill somewhere, or maybe it went to another firm in a dispersal sale, maybe an employee snagged the blocks with the intent of starting their own business, or maybe the blocks are sitting in an abandoned building gathering dust.

A VERY tall order, I know, but what a thing to find!

LJ

Raiders of the Lost Block.

[IndianaSean]

David was selling adventure wear before the indy thing happened. Those that are old enough will remember the pre-Raiders, post Watergate world. The Deerhunter and Apocolypse Now. Indy's really responsible for the whole invention of Dockers, etc. Before that, if you wanted classy and durable khaki wear, David Morgan was the guy. He inmported all the good stuff from Australia. Also, some of the remaining outfitter companies from the Alaskan gold rush were still selling high quality stuff in Seattle, like Filson. LA was about fashion. Portland and San Francisco were still all about hippies. Seattle was the place on the west coast for real outfitters.

Indeed it was!! Places like Eddie Bauer (before it got posh) and Filsons still exits here! Great, tough, and reliable adventure gear!

Sean

[BendingOak]

It does help but just because the paper states researching doesn't give the whole story. Lets not assume.

[BendingOak]

I understand that but it only seems to have one word and doesn't tell the whole story. Could she have gone back a couple of times and not paid for anything?could she have done other things while she was there? That one note doesn't tell the whole story.

[BendingOak]

I understand that but it only seems to have one word and doesn't tell the whole story. Could she have gone back a couple of times and not paid for anything?could she have done other things while she was there? That one note doesn't tell the whole story.

Gotcha. The idea of her paying/not paying? Deb expensed coffee and a muffin. I don't see her paying for things and not getting reimbursed, and this particular group of folks ran a tight and accurate ship. I think there is some creativity in her recounting of things around a core thread of truth. As with Peter Botwright, there is good work for her to be proud of but I believe was have some exageration as well. JMO, and I hear you...

I'm not saying she bought anything but could have gone back and worked with swales. Stretching the truth is what most people do but we should not fill in, add on of stretch it our selves when investigating these things. We want facts not truths.