(first posted 11/22/2017) A short while ago, in a recent CC post the thought was raised that we are now living in a time of boring automotive sameness, now trapped in the equivalent of the “styling doldrums” so to speak, awaiting a new direction similar to the beginning of the 1960’s when the advanced clean lines of the 1961 Lincoln Continental lead the way into a new styling language.
It is likely worthwhile to briefly look back to what actually makes styling trends, and that is usually a visionary artist leading the stylistic direction that a corporate bureaucracy will follow in order to make profits. The styling of a product stirs the imagination of a customer’s emotional side and often matters more than the engineering excellence of the product in opening up the customers wallet for purchase. In this case, the inherent beauty has a way of exciting the soul and emotions of a customer in a way that mechanical parts don’t excite for most people. Styling beauty can evoke emotion, then desire.
So let’s look at the history of one of the great American automotive styling legends, William L. Mitchell, “the” Bill Mitchell (1912-1988 born in Cleveland, Ohio) to glimpse and maybe to learn how his spark of artistic genius developed, and to see what might be necessary for a new styling direction to develop.
The article you are about to read about Mitchell was written by Strother MacMinn (1919-1998) who grew up in Pasadena, California, became a boyhood friend of Frank Hershey who later worked for the Walter M. Murphy Body Company of Pasadena, California, opening in 1920 on Pasadena’s auto row. Murphy Body built approximately 125 Duesenberg bodies with simple refined taste, additionally built bodies for Lincoln under Edsel’s Ford’s guidance, and, as we saw previously, styled and built aluminum intensive bodies for the Peerless Motor Company, of Cleveland, Ohio.
Frank Q. Hershey (1907-1997), an older boyhood friend of the young boy Strother, had ties to Henry Leland, founder of both Cadillac and, then later, Lincoln. Henry Leland personally taught Frank Hershey’s mother to drive. As a teenager, Frank Hershey obsessed with drawing cars, and then transferred that passion and enthusiasm to Strother.
Frank Hershey was hired by Murphy when he graduated from college at age 20 (1927), and designed a flamboyant 3 toned dual phaeton for the Cord L29, delighting Everett Cord and leading to his successful career at Murphy designing for Cord, Auburn, and Duesenberg, Lincoln, and Peerless. When Frank moved on to the GM Art and Color Section he helped MacMinn at age 17 in 1936 to get his first job in the Buick Studio, introducing him to Bill Mitchell, then 24 years of age. Mitchell was 24 when he was made Cadillac’s Chief Designer by Harley Earl. Strother MacMinn experienced those early dynamic years of his career with Earl and Mitchell.
In 1937 Harley Earl assigned MacMinn, then 18, to a new studio to develop the Opel Kapitan. MacMinn left GM for service during WW2, returned after the war to work with industrial designer Henry Dreyfuss. In 1948 he began teaching at the Art Center College of Design. Pasadena, California where he taught over the next fifty years. Approximately half of the world’s auto stylists have graduated from the Art Center College of Design. So Pasadena has been a center point of automotive styling since 1920.
In the late 1950’s Road & Track’s publishing editor, John Bond, urged development of a modern Le Mans Sports Car. Strother MacMinn. then about 40 years of age, rose to the challenge of designing, styling, and actually building a drivable sports car featured on the cover of R&T in August 1960.
McMinn saw it all, and he wrote this article about William (Bill) L. Mitchell for Automobile Quarterly, published second quarter 1988, in Volume 26, number 2. So what we have is an eminent industrial designer’s view on Bill Mitchell whom he knew when they were both young men at the beginning of their automotive styling careers.
So enjoy reading about Bill Mitchell who had a passion about automotive art and driving–both of which Mitchell felt were essentials for a successful stylist. The real question for the age is whether profound deep corporate control can allow creativity like that of Mitchell’s and Earl’s to flourish again.
This was a very interesting read. I have done a reasonable amount of reading on Raymond Loewy and Virgil Exner but not much on Mitchell, so this fills a large gap.
Mitchell and Exner came to GM Art & Colour not far apart in time but their trajectories were so different. A book on Exner I read quoted someone as saying that Exner was an artist who ran a styling studio while Mitchell and George Walker (at Ford) were sonofabitches who ran styling studios. This piece makes clear that Mitchell was a leader both as an artist and in the kinds of corporate hardball that gets more of the artists’ work to the showroom.
Thanks for posting this.
I hadn’t intended to read the whole article at breakfast today, but it was so captivating that I couldn’t stop. This made me realize just how little I knew about Bill Mitchell.
One phrase sticks out to me, about the design profession:
“There was no specific educational pattern as there is today…”
I don’t claim to be an expert on anything design-related, but it seems like the ossified “specific educational patterns” prevalent in nearly every profession now stifles a great deal of innovation. For instance, in both my profession and my wife’s, not only do younger workers need to check off very specific educational requirements and professional certifications just to get considered for a job, but to get good jobs, they need to attend a handful of the “right” colleges, etc. That stuff is usually considered more important that drive, ambition or creativity.
This has led (in my limited experience) to an echo-chamber effect, where the same ideas are endlessly regurgitated, and those doing the regurgitating pat themselves heartily on the back for all their hard work. Does this same phenomenon occur in the car design field? I have no idea, but I suspect that it does, and further suspect that in Bill Mitchell’s era it was much less dominant.
Again, I’m no expert on design, but to my untrained eye, most modern cars look boring, and car design seems to be changing at a much slower pace than in the past. Maybe I’m just grumpy today and ranting too much, but I think that some fresh perspectives and fresh enthusiasm would greatly benefit design studios and car manufacturers. Or, in other words, “GOYA!”
Engineers need a specific educational pattern. Artists or designers should find it useless towards developing their innate talents, save for historical perspective. Unless one becomes an entrepreneur and starts their own company, you are spot on that there is an echo chamber that is stifling creativity in favor of metrics. You do not hear of the kid who has great ideas but no degree being given a chance, rather, some HR hack chooses 3 almost identical candidates for consideration for an opening. Design studios seem to be turning out students who have very similar ideas for designs. I think that is why the retro craze from a few years back hit as hard as it did.The current crop of designs are so alike that going back to an old model seemed suddenly fresh and new.
I agree with J Frank. There was a time when a bright, ambitious, hard-working person could get noticed and given a chance even without the formal education that most others in a field might have had. That time seems to be in the past.
They still can, in tech. There’s not only no stigma attached to not having a degree in tech, but it’s actually seen in a positive light to some extent. Putting together your first start-up before graduating is a much better “degree” than the one on paper.
And of course that’s where the brightest kids go, largely. Back in the day, cars were “tech”, and it attracted the brightest kids; not anymore.
Similar thing happened to education. Back in the day, the brightest young women went into education; now it’s just about the opposite, and the effect on our educational system is all-too obvious.
I could go on; it’s happening in many professions that once attracted the brightest kids; certainly politics. And even medicine, I hate to say it.
For better or for worse, tech (and to a somewhat lesser extent, Wall Street) is siphoning away all the best talent, at the expense of a lot of other professions.
Paul, you are absolutely correct on the tech industry. As a software engineer, I would not hesitate to hire someone with no degree if they have a solid open-source software portfolio. On the contrary, I’ve interviewed grads from top-line engineering schools who struggled with the most basic of questions.
I myself have 2 degrees completely unrelated to the industry, but have had an almost 20-year career in it.
So true about tech. I think a big part of why Tesla has been able to scoop up lots of talent is that they position themselves as a Silicon Valley tech company that makes cars rather than a traditional automaker.
Yes, this is where I am now.
A qualified automotive designer who is unemployable as I have no OEM studio experience.
Incidentally I’m also an experienced graphic designer who is unemployable due to being unqualified
I thought about the same thing as I read the comment.
I’ve wondered the same thing about jazz. Granted, much of it IS exciting and innovative. But how much is being lost when it’s only taught formally?
Eric, keep in mind that when Earl was starting the GM Design studio (Art and Colour Section) there were zero school trained designers. The field didn’t exist; not even industrial design at that time. So Earl cast a wide net, wherever he could find guys with either some experience or apparent talent. Including kids straight out of high school. And it was brutal too; survival of the fittest. the turnover rate was very high.
There’s a reason GM spent a lot of money supporting the professionalization of automotive design. They wanted the schools to weed out the better talent from the lesser. Which is the function of schools, or it used to be. Today it seems like everyone is an A student, regardless of talent. That alone has changed a lot, and not in a good way.
“Which is the function of schools, or it used to be.”
Yes, that’s exactly it. In many fields (and again, I’m not targeting auto design exclusively) and in education, a degree or certificate has become little more than a validation that someone has spent the time and money to receive a credential. Perversely, such credentials have become more important than ever.
This has become one of my pet peeves — from elementary education (where I’m battling absurd bureaucracies at my kids’ school) through professional education (younger employees at work lack even the most basic skills & common sense, yet have advanced degrees). Once I started noticing how messed up our education & hiring systems have become, it was hard to stop noticing.
As you point out, the Old Days, when young workers were put through brutal stress in order to prove themselves, weren’t exactly Great, but it seems that we’ve gone overboard in trying to compensate for that.
Even though I have no desire to ever own a Corvette, I have to say I really like the looks of the Mako Shark II concept best. I feel it best represented future design evolution.
This was a great read. One minor note: Bill Mitchell died in 1988, not 1998.
Fixed now. Thanks.
Wow. Wonderful read and illustrations. Helps flesh out the perceptions I’d long carried about Mitchell.
Skipped over my favorite Mitchell car, the ’67 Eldo. But a great read.
(That red suit, though!…)
I wasn’t able to read all the text from the featured articles, but I loved all the pictures. Thanks for posting this.
He looks like one of the villains on Batman in that red suit.
I’m with you guys! I like red, but! The only thing not red that he’s wearing are white shoes. And, the interior of the car he’s at is also red. And, to top it all off, did you notice that his face is kinda red! Ughhhh….
Some first-person memories here:
http://www.autoextremist.com/current/2017/4/26/bill-mitchell-the-passionate-design-maestro.html
I recommend DeLorenzo’s account as well. Mitchell was one of a kind. A master.
Love the shark colour story!
Similar hijinks may have been employed in catalysing the final selection between a myriad of virtually identical paint colours for apartment interiors around these parts… nobody notices, no harm done, life goes on.
Thanks for posting this informative and comprehensive article. Bill Mitchell was a legendary figure, like his predecessor Harley Earl. So many memorable auto designs came from this period. I suppose that the constraints of corporate product planning, safety regulations, and changing consumer tastes have made the design business much tougher. American cars from this period may not have been the best engineered in areas of safety and chassis performance, but they did sure look good!
Errata: corrections,
Strother MacMinn, born 1919–died 1998
Bill Mitchell, born Cleveland, Ohio July 2, 1912. Died Royal Oak, Michigan Sept. 12, 1988
If you want the Hollywood Babylon version of Mitchell get a hold of Smokey Yunick’s self published book (which is very good). One of the reasons it was self published is that he didn’t want to be muzzled. Smokey tells one story about Mitchell that is crazy as hell, I’ll leave it at that. Smokey was a horndog also.
What a great read! Thanks for posting this.
Terrific article. That’s why GM was a style leader for decades – Earl got the styling dept. going and turned it into a well-oiled fiefdom, then passed it to the one guy whose feet were big enough to fill the shoes he wore.
Several automakers got one exceptional designer who had the time to do his thing (e.g. Bracq at BMW, Issigonis at BMC or Teague at AMC). Only GM (and Citroën) got two incredibly gifted and long-lasting designers back-to-back.
M-B: Geiger into Sacco via Bracq
That’s a saga I’d like to read more of- it would have been so easy for M-B to go off the rails, but they -and Audi and BMW- somehow settled into a classy conservatism. Was it all on executive at Deutsche Bank with very refined taste, or just German culture?
If it would have been “German culture”, German cars would look different today …
Great profile of a great designer. His time was GM’s high point and responsible for many of my favourite cars. Chopping the roof of the 63 Riviera proves you shouldn’t mess with perfection, surprising that saw it the light of day.
And a minor correction, Mr L29 was Errett Lobban “E. L.” Cord
Thanks geelongvic. I don’t have this issue and these pages are gold.
Never seen than red MacMinn racer before, at first glance I thought it was Franco Scaglione’s Prince Skyline Sprint shown in 63.
…
I love this and DeLorenzo’s personal account. Truly a larger than life character. I don’t care so much for the haigiographic aspects of this, but it is what it is.
Ah, your point is well understood.
Hagiography/hagiography (Cambridge English Dictionary definition):
1. “A very admiring book about someone or a description of someone that represents the person as perfect or much better than they really are, or the activity of writing about someone in this way.
2. Writings about the lives of holy people as saints.
The purpose of this article is not to canonize “Bill Mitchell”, although he did participate in the production of , especially in hindsight, of miraculously beautiful works of automotive art allowing him entry into the automotive firmament, the automotive Valhalla of Design.
Some say that Bill Mitchell didn’t participate in the design of the “Popemobile”, more is the pity for that.
Great article for sure. For those that are really familiar with Automobile Quarterly or AQ for short it was and is in my opinion probably the best automotive magazine that was ever published. I have a complete set and still read and look through them regularly. If you really like cars it’s a great addition to your home automotive library.
Great article! I was once allowed to park my newly acquired ’66 Sting Ray next to the ’60 Mako Shark in the GM Tech Center garage overnight when I was working there in the ’90s.
Bill Mitchell left his mark on so many wonderful designs, leading a superb team that brought litheness and beauty of surfacing to replace the overblown vehicles that marked the end of “Misterl”‘s reign and set trends in the industry. His C2 Corvette inspired me to become a car designer, so I guess I am a little biased, but IMHO he is one of the greatest designers of any era.
What is notable is how young he and McMinn were when starting out – their natural talent can be seen from their earliest works.
So true! My wife, a professional ballet dancer 20+ years and veteran of two prestigious ballet companies (Hamburg and Balletmet Columbus), could not teach beginning ballet at a community college without a bachelor’s degree in dance.
Oddly, none of the dancers she ever knew or worked with professionally had degrees in dance….they just had talent….and yes, training, but not at the college level.
When I retired my boss wanted me to review the job posting for my position from HR. I told him it looked fine and that ironically I wouldn’t qualify for an interview for my position. The position had a minimum education requirement, A four year Bachelor Degree from accredited colleges and also a Fleet Management degree from a select list of providers.
I’ve been gone 7 years, they have been thru 5 hires and the position is currently open.
How far do you suppose that Henry Ford would get nowadays with his eighth grade eduction, to try to get hired by the very company that bears his own name?
There are many other examples besides Henry Ford. Clessie Cummins (Cummins Engine) and Edwin Land (Polaroid) had no formal education beyond public schools and Clessie didn’t even graduate high school. Beyond software engineering, companies today will not hire non-degreed professionals. When I started my career (mechanical engineering) there were a lot of non-degreed people but HR put a stop to that.
“Imagination is more important than knowledge” – Einstein
Regarding the dress in the opening image, I thought:
“A man with severe sexuell problems.”
Could someone please “confirm or deny” this Bill Mitchell story?
Mitchell strode into a board meeting of his design staff, tossed a handful of Mopar “Forward Look” brochures on the board room table and sarcastically said to the assembled group: “Why don’t you guys just QUIT!”
I’m not pretending to be the final word, but I’ve never read anything like that. The other thing that makes me doubt it is Harley Earl was in charge of styling at that time. The story I have seen numerous times is Chuck Jordan can upon a Chrysler Assembly Plant parking area and saw the ’57s during lunch and came back and got a bunch of his colleagues to come and take a look. Harley Earl was in Europe going to car shows at that time and the studios started working on unauthorized concepts inspired by the Mopars. When he came back he was mad but did reconsider and then fully endorsed what became the last year of cars he was in charge of (1959).
This sounds true to me – I worked for Chuck at GM Design in the early ’90s and also heard this from some others who had served during that period.
The proposed ’59s looked bloated and the designs that replaced them were much better – i particularly like the Buick, which was the “lead” design.