What The Operators Overheard in 1907

When the Bell System first offered telephone service to subscribers, it hired teenage boys for operators. Now, teenage boys have many virtues, but patience, focus, and the ability to take criticism are not chief among them. When the number of irate customers rose sharply, the company replaced them with women operators.

Women, the company reasoned, were tactful, helpful, dedicated, attentive to details—and they could work harder than most men thought possible. They could deftly handle the callers who became furious when told the number they were calling was busy.

In those days, the job of a telephone operator—also called a “Hello Girl” or “Central”— was far from easy. First, she had to take all responsibility for electric shocks she received from her “operating board.” She also had to memorize the position of 300 phone numbers on the board directly in front of her.

She was expected to use only the language approved by the company. Numbers could be read only one way. (The number 2000 could only be spoken as “two oh, double-oh.” 4001 was “four, double-oh, one.”) The company also directed them to give the time in “railroad style”: not “twelve minutes to nine” but “eight forty-eight.” The rest of her speech was limited to a handful of approved expressions:

“Number?”

“They don’t answer.”

“Line busy.”

“Line out of order.”

“I have no such number; please refer to your directory.”

“Telephone has been taken out.”

“I will give you Information.”

“I will give you Chief Operator.”

Lastly, an operator had to be fast.

Central … takes care of six or seven customers a minute. During the rush hour she supplies 360 connections in 60 minutes; under stress of intense public excitement she has a record of answering 15 calls per minute. [“‘Hello’ Girls” by Harris Dickson, Sept 26, 1908]

There was one small compensation to all the drawbacks of being a “Hello Girl,” according to Dickson:

In her spare time, she dearly loves to listen to telephone chatter—by way of novelty and recreation.

Officially, the Bell Systems didn’t allow operators to listen in to conversations, Dickson reported. (In France, he added, privacy was enforced by the Government.) Operators were prohibited to marry anyone on a long list of forbidden bridegrooms: police employees, detectives, government officials, foreigners, etc. so they wouldn’t be tempted to divulge any secrets they overheard.

The anonymous author of “The Diary of a Telephone Girl: The Work of a Human Spider in a Web of Talking Wires” readily admitted eavesdropping.

There are sometimes long enough intervals … for me to be able to read or write letters. They put on a bell attachment that rings for every call, so I can’t fail to answer.

Of course I had plenty of time for listening, and it was so exciting sometimes that I hated to stop long enough to answer another call.

The other night I switched a friend of mine on to the line, opened his listening key and others in turn, so that for an hour he could overhear all sorts of private conversations, one after the other.

It’s so queer to press down the row of “listening keys” one after another and get bits of the different conversations!  Different voices, different dialects, different emotions, tempers, subjects! All sliced off like Neapolitan ice cream—little bits of pulsing human lives.  The girls do awfully mean things when they’re exasperated by angry subscribers. You can, for instance, switch three or four couples together—a pair of lovers, maybe, two business men and one woman gossiping to another—and then sit and hear them rage at each other.

It was interesting, too, to notice how the character of the talk changed as the hour grew late. The conversations seemed to grow more familiar and confidential and affectionate toward eleven o’clock.

There are several distinct types that I can recognize immediately and I almost know what they’re going to say.

First, at 7 o’clock, there are scattered calls, usually important, for doctors, perhaps; and you have to ring and ring, because the subscribers hate so to get up and answer the ‘phone.

At 8 o’clock, the nice, early-morning women come on to market with patient, affable butchers. They always want a tender joint and fresh vegetables. “Yes, ma’am!” say the butchers.

At 9, the business man in a hurry, in a loud, violent tone, impatient and cross, bullying the operator, and then, when he gets his number, lowering his voice to an amiable growl.

At 10, interminable conversation between women over the “flat-rate” ‘phones with infinite details as to clothes. There’s no five-minute limit to talks with this company and you can’t cut them off. I’ve known them to keep it up for three-quarters of an hour. [Imagine: talking on the phone for 45 minutes!—ed.]

At 11 to half-past there’s a lull, punctuated, perhaps, by nippy ladies calling up employment agencies [looking to replace a servant], or stupid servant girls replying.

At 11:30 till 12:30 there’s a wild rush, everybody trying to catch everybody else for lunch.

From then till 3 or so there are characteristic calls of all sorts: peevish, hurried females who use the nickel ‘phones in the downtown drug stores, and who have just got to have their numbers; silly schoolgirls mischievously calling up men they don’t know; sporting men [placing bets] in an unintelligible racing jargon, and so on.

From 3 to 4 it slows down again. Then there’s likely to be a flurry of women trying to call up stores before they close, or in time to catch the last deliveries.

At 5, wives begin to call up to know if husbands are coming home, and if not, why not? Apologetic replies from offices as business men attempt to explain. Or, if he’s coming, “Be sure to bring home a steak or a lobster.” He (in disgust): “Why couldn’t you have ordered them this morning?”

From 6 till 7 everybody seems to be too busy to call up, except the younger people, girls and youths, who joke and [plan to meet later]. This is a good hour, too, for the obsequious underling, the club hallboy or the clerk of a garage, who has taken orders and been respectful all day, to talk down to the telephone operator. Now, along toward 8, comes the nervous maiden, calling up her men, too uncertain of their reception to bully Central as she usually does.

From 9 on not many calls.

After 10:30 come the calls [for taxis and chauffeurs] and the hotel private exchanges begin to get busy.

Then, at 11 and on through till 2, the reporters with strange tales.

I hate the reporters. They always have the most thrillingly interesting conversations, but if I listen on the line they always know it and get mad. “ Get off the line, Central,” they say, “or I’ll stop talking!” No matter how softly I press back my listening key, they seem to know I’m listening, and then they talk so horridly that I simply have to shut the key.

With automation replacing most phone operators, there are far fewer people to eavesdrop on your conversation. Besides, the whole idea of private phone conversations seem quaint in an age of cell phones. You don’t need to become an eavesdropping operator when callers walk through airports and stores handing out free samples of their private lives.

July Covers I – 100, 75 & 25 Years Ago

Classic Art: A Leyendecker July 4th

The most prolific cover artist from The Saturday Evening Post, J.C. Leyendecker, influenced the way we look at Santa during Christmas, turkeys and pies at Thanksgiving, and fireworks on the Fourth of July.

“Fourth of July, 1911”

Fourth of July, 1911 from July 1, 1911

“Fourth of July, 1911”
from July 1, 1911

 

A style that went from comic to elegantly lavish to sentimental made J.C. Leyendecker the most versatile of all the Post artists. His March 1909 cover gives us a delightful rendition of newly inaugurated William Howard Taft (See Post Presidential Covers) and an April 1912 cover shows a sumptuously attired couple on their Easter walk. From there he ventures into humor as in this cover of an urchin courting trouble.

Leyendecker was hired by legendary publisher, George Horace Lorimer, who purchased the Post in 1897, when it had a circulation of a few thousand. Less than 15 years later, this cover boasts of a circulation of “more than a million and three-quarters weekly.”


“July Fourth at the Beach”

July Fourth at the Beach from July 2, 1921

“July Fourth at the Beach”
from July 2, 1921

 

Leyendecker illustrated more than 300 Post covers from 1899-1943 and became the go-to artist for the holidays. His New Year’s baby was legendary and it is a testament to the illustrator’s longevity that he did 36 of these. He also did more Christmas covers (although Rockwell was close behind) and far more Thanksgiving and Fourth of July covers (27 each) than any other Post artist.

The Leyendecker baby mostly, but not exclusively, represented the fresh, young New Year. The tot showed up occasionally at Easter, and as we see here, dressed in red, white, and blue for a 4th of July beach holiday.

“Fourth of July Parade”

 "Fourth of July Picnic" from July 3, 1915

“Fourth of July Picnic”
from July 3, 1915

 

Joseph Christian Leyendecker was born in a tiny village on the Rhine in 1874. His brother, Frank X. Leyendecker came along three years later. Frank, who also became an artist, did 15 Saturday Evening Post covers.

The family immigrated to Chicago in 1882. Joe was able to devote himself to art full time at age 16, although the family, which was lower middle class, could barely afford the luxury of art instruction for their sons.

The hottest day of the year is not deterring this corpulent couple from attending the local parade in this 1915 cover. By the way, mom and pop might want to keep an eye on Junior — those are firecrackers he’s hiding.

“Washington and WWI Soldiers”

Washington and WWI Soldiers June 30,1917

“Washington and WWI Soldiers”
from June 30,1917

 

Wartime brings out the patriotism, and Leyendecker invoked the spirit of George Washington to march along with the soldiers of World War I. This 1917 cover was the first of five times the artist painted Washington on the cover.


The following issue of the Post showed another side of the artist’s talent and patriotism: a recruitment ad for the United States Navy:

“Why Not Now?”

from July 7, 1917

from July 7, 1917

 

“Fourth of July, 1913”

 "Fourth of July, 1913" from July 5, 1913

“Fourth of July, 1913”
from July 5, 1913

 

Newspaper hats in the early 20th century seemed to show up for festive occasions: a Christmas 1903 cover shows children wearing newspaper hats while playing with their new toys; a 1919 Rockwell cover shows a child wearing just such a hat to welcome a homecoming soldier; and these children are decked out in stars, stripes, and newsprint to salute the 4th on this cover from 1913.

“Minute Man”

"Minute Man" from June 29, 1929

“Minute Man”
from June 29, 1929

 

In this 1929 cover it is the image of a rugged, can-do Minute Man that symbolized independence for the 4th. Both Leyendecker and his friend and admirer, Norman Rockwell, relished period costumes and loved painting them. This is also the image most associated with Leyendecker: the handsome, dignified, chisel-featured man who was personified in his ads for Arrow Collars. Beginning in 1905 and continuing for 25 years, the “Arrow Collar Man” was the ideal American male.

“Arrow Collar ad”

from 1914

from 1914

 

A 1914 ad for Arrow Collars. Leyendecker was as well known for the Arrow Collar man as for his hundreds of magazine covers.


Questions about Post artists or covers can be addressed to [email protected]. Reprints of covers are available at Art.com.

Do Palm Oils Increase Heart Risk?

I know that coconut oil is bad for a person. What about palm oil?

The answer depends on whether the oil is extracted from the fruit versus the kernel (pit) of the Elaesis guineensis palm plant. Both oils are high in saturated fats, which the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute warns can increase heart attack and stroke risk. But emerging data suggest that palm fruit oil used in moderation delivers a unique blend of fats that provide health benefits and also contain antioxidants.

So check labels carefully when selecting palm oil products. And another caution: Avoid palm oils sold in processed or fractionated form. It increases shelf life but reduces potential health gains.

A “Good” Saturated Fat?

All fats are not created equal: Even saturated versions can be heart-healthy in moderation. Preliminary data show the unique blend of fatty acids and antioxidants (including vitamin E and CoQ10) in red palm fruit oil—once considered a sacred food in tropical Africa—support eye, skin, and heart health. Additionally, this colorful yet mild oil may be better than a good olive oil (which tastes anything but neutral) for cooking and baking (see recipe below).

Red palm fruit oils, including a blend of red palm and canola oil, are available online and in stores.

Note: Always check product labels carefully. Only purchase those containing palm fruit oil—not the less nutritious (and less expensive) palm kernel oil.

The following recipe is courtesy of Chef Gerard Viverito, CEC, CHE.

 

Seared Halibut over Beet Salad with Broken Tomato and Red Palm Fruit Oil Vinaigrette

(Makes 4 servings.)

Red Palm Fruit Oil Vinaigrette

Ingredients

5 large vine-ripened tomatoes or 1 can if out of season

2/3 cup red palm fruit oil

2 teaspoons minced garlic

1 tablespoon freshly squeezed lemon juice

Gray salt and freshly ground pepper

Directions

Core tomatoes, chop, place in blender, and puree. Strain through sieve into bowl for about 2 1/2 cups puree.

Heat 1 tablespoon of red palm fruit oil in non-reactive medium saucepan until hot. Add garlic and sauté briefly until golden. Add puree and bring to a boil. Reduce heat and simmer 5 minutes. Strain through fine-mesh sieve into bowl, and discard solids. Repeat twice more until mixture is thick as cream, about 15 minutes total cooking time for 1/4 cup of very smooth tomato juice. (Caution: Lower heat as mixture thickens to prevent scorching.) Add 1 tablespoon lemon juice and add salt and pepper to taste. Coat a funnel and glass bottle with red palm fruit oil. Cool and strain tomato juice into prepared bottle. Add equal amount of red palm fruit oil to bottle. Shake gently to mix.

Raw Beet Salad

Ingredients

3 small raw beets, trimmed and peeled

¼ teaspoon grated orange zest

1 shallot, minced

1 tablespoon apple cider vinegar

1 tablespoon agave syrup

2 tablespoons good-quality extra virgin olive oil

¼ teaspoon Dijon mustard

Salt and pepper to taste

Directions

Cut beets on julienne blade of mandoline, or grate on box grater.

Combine beets, orange zest, and shallots in medium bowl.

In small bowl, whisk together apple cider vinegar, agave, olive oil, mustard, salt, and pepper. Pour mixture over salad and toss gently to combine.

Fish

Ingredients

4 5-ounce halibut fillets

Salt and pepper to taste

2 tablespoons red palm fruit oil

Directions

Season fish on both sides with salt and pepper. Heat 2 tablespoons of red palm fruit oil in large sauté pan over medium-high heat. Place presentation side of fish (skinless side) in pan first for best caramelization. Cook until golden on first side, about 3 minutes. When the fish gets opaque around edges, give it another minute and flip to other side. Cook another minute. Remove from pan and plate over beet salad, spoon palm fruit oil vinaigrette around the plate. Serve immediately.

Simply Sumptuous Summer Recipes

These quick and yummy recipes from GMA lifestyle expert, mother of four, and author Holly Mosier are perfect for a single serving, but can be easily modified for more.

Holly’s Cheese Blintzes

“These blintzes are to die for—and you’ll feel great for hours thanks to the balance of proteins, carbs, and fats they provide. I eat them every day for breakfast!” says Mosier.

Ingredients

(Makes 1 serving or 2 crepes.)

Holly’s Shopping Tips:

*Don’t buy part-skim ricotta. It is much higher in calories and fat than the low-fat product! My favorite is brand is Market Pantry from Target because it is somewhat dry.

** Look for 60-calorie crepes in grocery stores near the fruits.

Directions

  1. Preheat oven to 350°F.
  2. In bowl mix ricotta, cinnamon, vanilla, and sweetener.
  3. Place crepes on lightly sprayed baking sheet.
  4. Spoon half of ricotta mixture into middle of each crepe. Fold in ends, and roll like a burrito. Sprinkle with cinnamon sugar, if desired.
  5. Bake until lightly browned, about 20 minutes. Top with ½ cup fresh fruit for extra antioxidants.

 

 

Holly’s Cinnamon Salmon

“This dynamite recipe happened by chance! One day I was making salmon with lemon pepper. My cookie sheet still had cinnamon on it from the cheese blintzes, but I used it anyway. Oddly enough, the salmon was incredibly delicious! My friends love it, too,” says Mosier.

Ingredients

Directions

  1. Preheat oven to 425°F.
  2. Sprinkle each side of fillet liberally with lemon pepper and add dash of cinnamon.
  3. Place salmon fillet in baking dish sprayed with cooking spray.
  4. Bake for about 15 minutes or until done.

Stress Less, Weigh Less: Follow Holly to Increase Energy, Eat the Food You Love, and Enjoy an Ageless Body

Gallery: Mass Transit Through the Years

To accompany “The Looming Crisis in Mass Transit” from our Jul/Aug 2012 issue, we’ve highlighted some of our favorite transportation-themed Post covers. We welcome your comments below.

Make a Beaded Bookmark

Beaded bookmarks and books.

Sure, an e-reader like the Kindle, iPad, or Nook can satisfy you with a library of delightful reads, but they still can’t mimic the warm, woodsy smell of a good book.

So grab a length of ribbon, yarn, or cord; gather some beads, charms, or coins; and craft a beaded bookmark to hold a savory spot in your favorite tangible bestseller.

How to Make a Beaded Bookmark

 

  1. Cut 18 inches of cord, ribbon, or yarn. Tie a knot three inches from one end.
  2. String beads to cover 1 1/2 inches of cord and knot at bottom of beads.
  3. end of beaded bookmark
  4. Tie knot five inches from opposite end of cord (leaving 10 inches between knots).
  5. String beads to cover 3 inches of cord to make “bottom” of bookmark, adding a unique bead or charm if desired. Tie knot. Trim cord 1/4 inch on each end.*
  6. *If you do not want any cord hanging on the end of your bookmark, dab a little craft glue on the end knots, let dry, and then cut the excess cord at the knot’s edge.

 

What Government Needs to Do

The stage is set for a renaissance in public transportation, says former chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Jim Oberstar.

In the 20th century, the car was king. State and federal road building programs and cheap, abundant energy opened up vast expanses of our country for people to explore, and sprawling suburbs for them to populate. However, today’s realities of congested highways, climbing fuel prices, and concerns over carbon emissions are changing the way many Americans think about transportation. Just as the highways prompted us to think big, these new factors are now encouraging us to think small: shorter commute times, less energy consumption, reduced pollution, and more efficient ways to get where we want to go. [See also: “The Looming Crisis in Mass Transit” from our Jul/Aug 2012 issue.]

The stage is set for a renaissance in public transportation. Simply put, we need to move away from the automobile as our primary means of conveyance. Today’s commuters are looking for a safe, clean, efficient, economical, and practical alternative to driving to work. Already public transportation systems in major American cities are experiencing near record ridership counts, creating a need for expansion of capacity and upgrading of both infrastructure and rolling stock. But we need to increase the scope and options for public transportation. Here’s why:

• Every dollar taxpayers invest in public transportation generates about six dollars in economic returns. This investment can be a catalyst for building construction, population growth, increased property values, rehabilitation of industrial sites, commercial influx, job creation, and congestion reduction.

• Public transportation saves the equivalent of 4.2 billion gallons of gas annually—about 900,000 auto fill-ups a day, according to the American Public Transportation Association. If drivers shifted to public transit at the rate of 10 percent of their daily travel, the U.S. would reduce its dependence on oil imports by more than 40 percent.

• Public transportation systems cost less to build than highways. In an urban setting, a mile of freeway costs up to $50 million to build. The same mile of light rail can cost half as much and moves two to three times as many people.

So, why not just do it, to borrow the catch phrase of a famous sneaker company? Public transportation faces several obstacles to growth in this country. For example, federal highway funds are distributed to the states on an 80-20 basis—80 percent federal funds to 20 percent state funds. However, transit programs get federal funding for only 40 to 60 percent of the cost, depending on the project. That differential makes it very tempting for states to direct their resources to highways, where the federal share of the costs is much larger. And, when new rail projects run across state borders—and sometimes even county lines—the approval process can make funding well-nigh impossible.

Another obstacle is how deeply embedded car culture is in the United States. People made choices to move from the cities to the suburbs, from the efficiency of the public transportation system to the convenience of private, personalized transportation. Transit lost public support in many cities. For example, Los Angeles had one of the most extensive streetcar systems in the country, but the city chose to tear up the tracks and build freeways to accommodate the car. Across the country, public transportation came to be considered as a conveyance of the elderly, disabled, and poor. Federal funding for transit was looked upon as a social program rather than as a transportation program.

We have to move away from this post-World War II mindset, to transform our thinking, and link land use and development to transportation. Other countries already know the benefits of investment in public transportation. In Paris, increased transit has reduced automobile traffic by 25 percent, prompting the city to invest an additional $45 billion to expand its Metro system and remove even more cars from city streets.

As chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, I proposed a transformational surface transportation program that would have invested $99.8 billion in public transportation over six years, and streamlined the approval process for transit projects. Unfortunately, the White House and Senate leadership did not think that the time was right to move such a comprehensive, and, yes, costly, transportation bill, and it stalled in the House. I believed then that such an investment was desperately needed. Today I believe it is needed even more.

Older transit systems in Boston, Chicago, New York, and other cities need rehabilitating. Most systems need expansion. It is up to the federal government, states, and local authorities to provide the dollars to upgrade these systems and reap the economic benefits they can provide.

Our nation has a rich history of visionary leaders with a strong commitment to public investment in transportation infrastructure. Will those who make decisions in Washington and the state capitals continue that tradition?

Only time will tell.

Jim Oberstar, D. Minnesota, served as a congressman for 36 years until 2011.


Halting the March of Progress?

 
 
In August of 1945, the city of San Francisco announced plans to dismantle its famous cable car system. The Post was in the thick of the uproar that followed. Mead Schaeffer’s September 29 cover helped “touch off an explosive burst of civic pride” that ultimately saved the cars, as writer Elmont Waite recounts in this article published five months later.

[See also: “The Looming Crisis in Mass Transit” from our Jul/Aug 2012 issue.]


February 9, 1946— “KOWFADAKUV!” echoes on in San Francisco, thanks to 1,349 assorted housewives, businessmen, writers, tourists, a Saturday Evening Post cover, and a sergeant sitting out on Iwo Jima. The city’s beloved antiques, those 1888-model cable cars, have beaten back the threat of civic progress. “Kowfadakuv!” which once sang past great-grandpa’s wind-whipped sideburns and which, of course, is English for the rule-book phrase, “Look out for the curve!” is now irretrievably immortal.

When progress recently reared its threatening head, there had been few improvements since Andrew Hallidie contrived the world’s first cable-car line in 1873 to scale the almost vertical San Francisco hillsides. Modern patrons seldom bother to glance inside that small part of each car which is enclosed with side walls and windows, for the accepted legend is that these spaces were filled with passengers at the factory when the cars were built. Most riders just plunk themselves on the benches, paralleling the track and facing out, that form the open front half of the cars, or they cling precariously outside on the step boards, like sardines hanging all over the outside of a can.

The crisis arrived last August. San Franciscans came face to face in their newspapers with the realization that they were about to lose the world’s first—and last—and indubitably most famous cable- car system. It was just that nobody seemed to want the job of running those half-pint cars any more. That, and the increasing laments of some of the clingers-on, who were beginning to assert that antiques ought to be kept in museums instead of in use.

The personnel problem looked insoluble. The utilities commission, which operates the city-owned part of the lines, feared that the conductors and gripmen (cable motormen) would be unable to resist better jobs on electric and bus lines, come September, when a general union sign-up for transportation employees was scheduled. The service, traditionally poor but spectacular, already was undermanned, and the city was forbidden by law to pay higher wages than comparable private industry. That was ninety-seven and a half cents, paid by the California Street Cable Railway Company, operator of the nonmunicipal section of the line, the only comparable industry in the world.

Then came sign-up day with its big surprise. Gripmen and conductors spat on their calloused hands and for some reason utterly unconnected with common sense stuck to their museum-piece jobs. Just one man deserted to an electric-line job—and darned if an electric-line man didn’t ask to replace him!

After that, spontaneously unfolded the project of curing the complaints of the chilled, soggy open-air riders. The women’s chamber of commerce sprang into a save-the-cable-cars campaign and Mead Schaeffer’s September 29 Post cover … helped touch off an explosive burst of civic pride. Housewives, businessmen, other letter writers from Corregidor to Peru, Indiana, expressed rage, shock, despair, disillusionment, and bitterness at the thought of San Francisco without a cable car. From Iwo Jima, Sgt. Martin Sugarman wrote to Chronicle Columnist Robert O’Brien, “Tear down the bay bridges, but leave our cable cars alone!” Fans offered money, offered to take the stump, offered to run the cars themselves. The riders quit complaining.

There was only one dissenter. A guest at a downtown hotel protested that the half-pint cars kept her awake. But she was a hopeless case. She lived in Los Angeles and didn’t even like foghorns.

ZZZ-Pass

 
 
In this unsigned editorial from the Post, the author has a modest proposal for improving the financial health of America’s transit systems.
 
 
[See also: “The Looming Crisis in Mass Transit” from our Jul/Aug 2012 issue.]

April 25, 1959—A transit expert, Henry K. Norton, gave himself a little fun recently by journeying 20,000 miles throughout Europe to look at transit facilities in twelve countries. It was purely a pleasure trip. Mr. Norton is … a former member of the New York City Transit Authority, which runs the subways there. [Editor’s note: Norton is also remembered as an advocate of the monorail.]

On his happy holiday Mr. Norton found a remarkable situation in Madrid. Nearly all transit systems in Europe are publicly owned, but the Madrid system is run by private enterprise. Not only that, but it makes money. If you were a stockholder in the Madrid subway, you would receive a dividend of 8 percent. Naturally Mr. Norton’s eyes opened wide at the news.

He sought the explanation, and he found it. “The real secret of Madrid’s success,” he says, “is the siesta. In New York we have two riding peaks–in the morning and evening rush hours. In Madrid there are four peaks. … The Madrid subway gets four rides a day out of everyone instead of two.”

It is disappointing to note that Mr. Norton, despite his acute intelligence, did not draw the logical conclusion from what he himself had observed. If the siesta is what makes the Madrid subway system prosper, why not introduce the siesta into the United States?

In every American city–from Bangor, Maine, to Honolulu and from Miami to Seattle–everyone who uses public transit to get to work would go home about midday to take a siesta. Instead of a hasty bite in a crowded eating-place, there would be a leisurely lunch, followed by a refreshing nap. Then back to the bus, the streetcar, the subway, the commuter train or the ferry for another ride to the job.

All this would take only two hours for most people, three for those living in the farthest parts of large cities or in the suburbs and four for exurbanites. Isn’t it pleasant to think that such a mild little reform, with such a slight loss of time, would bring back prosperity to the transit companies?

Caution! Danger Ahead!

Cartoon.

Trains were quickly losing passenger and freight revenue to automobiles between 1920 and 1929. In this 1931 article from the Post, Edward Hungerford, who was considered an authority on railroad history, is nostalgic for the once-popular railroad. In this abridged version, Hungerford suggests railroaders must unite to combat the competition.

[See also: “The Looming Crisis in Mass Transit” from our Jul/Aug 2012 issue.]

CAUTION! DANGER AHEAD!

January 31, 1931—A young man entered St. Lawrence University at Canton, New York, last autumn and confessed that he had never ridden upon a railroad train. One of the officers of the university, an ardent railroad fan, was most interested in this young man and took him, not long ago, for a ride on the local train to Ogdensburg. The boy said that he enjoyed the experience.

There are many boys and girls like this in American colleges today. In my day almost every boy knew the railroad and loved it. But the younger generation today begins to know the railroad as a tradition rather than as a practical or a really close-at-hand necessity.

Not long ago a railroad president went out into the Middle West to the dedication of a railroad station. When it was nearly over, a local banker approached the railroad president and congratulated him upon the elegance of the new building.

“Quite a monument to the railroad passenger business,” said he, in his impressive, bankerish way.

“Mausoleum would be a better word for it today,” replied the railroader.

He was thinking, rather sadly, of that former great factor in American railroading that of late has been slipping pretty rapidly. From a high peak of $1,305,000,000 in passenger-traffic revenues in 1920—the high record of all time—it descended, in an all too brief decade, to $780,000,000 in 1929. Slowly at first; just lately with alarming rapidity—toboggan-slide fashion.

Delaware River Bridge (now called the Benjamin Franklin Bridge) between Philadelphia and Camden.
Opened in 1926 the Delaware River Bridge (now called the Benjamin Franklin Bridge) allowed railroad and automobiles to cross the river.
Unfortunately there were, in 1920, problems not only of labor and of labor’s wages, not only of a morale seriously impaired by the long period of government control, but far more portentous, those of that swift-oncoming competitor, the automotive vehicle. The development of the motor car and the motorbus, the perfection of the national highway system, the cheapening of motor fuel all seemed to spell trouble for the important passenger end of the railroad business; while it was felt even then that the motortruck might yet become a serious competitor to the freight end of it.

It has been suggested that the present emergency is large enough to call a railroad convention-presidents, vice presidents and other high executives to continue in session for a week, if necessary, and to thrash out some of the problems that are so vexing to the business as a whole.

At this convention of railroad executives various questions would be pressed:

What shall be the attitude of the railroads toward highways and toward the waterways?

Shall they advocate regulation of the length, weight, and speed of motortrucks and coaches because of their destructive effects upon the highways and the dangers to which they expose private motorists?

What of taxing very heavily such vehicles?

How about meeting the competition of trucks by pick-up and delivery service from the door of the shipper to the consignee?

How about this question of lowered fares?

No battle was ever won by an army not sure of its course and reasonably sure of final victory. Cooperation is vastly more than a word, or a group of words.

It might be possible for the railroads to take a leaf out of the big book in the White House and appoint some sort of capable joint commission to make a careful study of the entire problem in all its many phases. The result of such a study, made by careful and experienced, yet progressive, men should also clear the present atmosphere. It is commended both to the rail carriers and to that far-reaching and powerful organization, the American Railway Association.

The American railroader goes his way slowly—sometimes too slowly. He is facing a real crisis, unquestionably. He has faced other crises—borne of them much more portentous than this one—and has come through them safely and with a smiling face. The present situation is by no means hopeless; the railroads have not ceased to be the very backbone of the nation’s transport system. It is the yellow signal that is displayed, not the red. Caution, not danger.

The Looming Crisis In Mass Transit

Illustration by Rodica Prato

In Normal, Illinois, the construction of a new bus-train station revitalized a neighborhood in decline. (Illustration by Rodica Prato) Click here to view more Post covers featuring mass transit.

Over the past 50 years America made massive public investments in its highways—hundreds of billions of dollars in the interstate system alone. And largely because of that investment, cities and suburbs have grown into sprawling, disconnected clusters, largely dependent on the automobile. But America is changing, and it’s time to rethink the way we travel. “We have to change that and give people more options,” says John Robert Smith, president of Reconnecting America, a nonprofit in Washington, D.C., that advises local leaders on transportation planning.

What’s the problem with car travel? Not to put too fine a point on it, but our current network of roads and more roads (with a piddling number of trains and buses along the margins) is not sustainable. Today, 91 percent of Americans commute to work in a car, usually alone. The daily cost of fuel for cars is a staggering $1 billion-plus. Then there is conservation: All told, American drivers burn roughly one-quarter of the world’s oil. [See also What Government Needs to Do by Jim Oberstar, former chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.]

Demographic trends also reflect a country reconsidering its settlement patterns and transportation networks, particularly in light of an expected population increase of more than 100 million new citizens over the next 40 years. Much of the population—from retiring boomers and young people alike—will be closer to city centers where mass transit is available.

Petra Todorovich, director of America 2050, a national urban planning organization in New York City, says when you look ahead a few years, better mass transit will be sorely needed. “We can’t just keep building more highways and creating more sprawl,” Todorovich says.

What is essential for the success of mass transit is not just building the infrastructure itself, but connectivity. Travelers need to get from point A to point B quickly and efficiently. But for mass transit to work well, those same travelers also need to be able to switch easily from a taxi, a bus, a ferry, an airplane, or a train in a matter of a few steps to continue on to point C. In Europe, trolleys and high-speed trains run into the airports and the switch is accomplished in a short escalator ride. It’s seamless, even intuitive.

In America, not so much. “We are 30 to 40 years behind Europe and Asia,” said Smith, who adds that the big push for mass transit will have to come from state, city, and county governments and filter up to the federal level.

Despite the obstacles to rebuilding America’s mass transit system—and there are quite a few obstacles—there are also a few bright lights. A few months ago, I went to California to write a piece about the proposed bullet train that would run between San Francisco and Los Angeles. There’d been a storm of political fighting over funding—the cost of the train may exceed $50 billion—and battles over where to put the right of ways, but it appears California will start laying track in late 2012. The 220-mph train would be one of the largest public works projects ever attempted in the United States, but California has a history of doing big and gutsy infrastructure projects.

While the complete bullet train is at least a decade off, California is moving ahead on mass transit. In 10 days of traveling between its major cities, I avoided renting a car, even calling a cab. For such a supposedly car-centric state, the connectivity was remarkable. For example, beginning in Oakland, I traveled to Sacramento on the Capitol Corridor, a train operated by Amtrak but subsidized by the state.

From there, I caught another corridor train, the San Joaquin to Bakersfield where I easily stepped on an express bus to downtown L.A. On the city’s metro system, I rode the Blue Line light rail out to Long Beach, the Red Line to Hollywood, and then city buses to see friends in Wilshire and Silver Lake.

To reach San Diego, I took the Pacific Surfliner which runs hourly out of L.A.’s Union Station, and then a trolley to my hotel in Old Town. Over the next few days, I was on Sprinter, Coaster, and Metrolink—all commuter trains—and the Surfliner again. And when it was time to fly home, I caught an express FlyAway bus from Union Station to LAX.

Outstripping ridership projections, light rail systems in Houston (top) and Charlotte (bottom) also attracted millions in transit-oriented development (TOD).
Outstripping ridership projections, light rail systems in Houston (top) and Charlotte (bottom) also attracted millions in transit-oriented development (TOD).

What is happening on the West Coast is being repeated around the country. New light rail systems are being built or expanded in Salt Lake City, Denver, Dallas, Portland, Seattle, Atlanta, Minneapolis-St. Paul, and Charlotte. Cities, such as L.A., are actually restoring service where decades ago they literally ripped out street car tracks to make room for cars. But it’s not just trains. Buses operating on natural gas, hybrid engines, and even overhead electrical wires are redefining city bus service. And in rural America, counties and other entities are finding ways to bring mass transit—typically bus or van service—to people who can’t afford cars or are unable to drive.

Mass transit is very much in the public eye, which is not surprising when one considers rising gas prices, highway congestion, unsustainable suburban sprawl, and an aging population. In 2011, Americans took 10.4 billion trips on public transportation, the second-highest annual ridership since 1957.

“For a long time, most transit riders were captive riders. They couldn’t afford a car and had to use the bus,” says Todorovich. “Now we are seeing more people using it as a lifestyle choice.”

Lifestyles matter, too. Many experts see America’s embrace of handheld devices and the desire to be connected electronically as another factor favoring mass transit over driving. Drive a car and you can’t or, at least, shouldn’t text. “If you are on a train or bus, you can stay on your iPad or smartphone,” adds Todorovich. And buses and trains that are Wi-Fi equipped make connecting that much easier.

It’s a big step from wanting or needing mass transit, to actually building it. With little clear direction from the feds, the solutions will be different for different localities. Which brings us to the bus-versus-train argument. Many urban areas are choosing to build light rail—even though improved bus service can be just as effective and would be a ton cheaper, says Professor G. Scott Rutherford, director of the TransNow Regional Center at the University of Washington in Seattle. That’s because buses run on infrastructure already in place—namely roads—and they are able to easily go off that right of way into neighborhoods, such as suburbs. Building new right of ways for trains is difficult and expensive, especially when trying to retrofit rail into highly urbanized environments.

But many cities see light rail as the only way to lure people out of their cars, says Rutherford. “There’s a rail bias,” he says. “Hey, I love trains, too, but an honest analysis in many communities would show that trains are not as good as buses.”

He points out that the common image of the loud and smoky city bus is a thing of the past. Buses today are cleaner, quieter, and quite efficient compared to automobiles.

Just as important, despite my successful experiment in California, in most American cities, bus stations, train stations, and airports were not built with an eye toward connectivity. Most such travel hubs are separated by several miles—the only transport option is an expensive cab ride. Even where there are attempts at connectivity, they are often problematic. In Milwaukee, Amtrak’s commuter train stops near Mitchell Airport, but passengers have to board a shuttle bus and then be deposited at the front of the airport. At the Seattle-Tacoma (Sea-Tac) Airport, the new light rail train only gets within 1,200 feet of the baggage area. The train station is located in the parking garage.

The obstacles range from turf wars to simple lack of foresight: “You could put the bus right in the front of the terminal, but the airport doesn’t want to interfere with single passenger cars picking up passengers. And because it sells parking, it doesn’t want to sacrifice spaces to get the train closer,” Rutherford says. “A lot of problems are jurisdictional. Transit crosses regional and political boundaries and there are competing interests.”

A Monorail in Los Angeles?

Monorail.
In 1964 Los Angeles County’s transit system was makeshift at best. Citizens could travel on a combination of busses and railways. But the county lacked a forward-thinking plan.

[See also: “The Looming Crisis in Mass Transit” from our Jul/Aug 2012 issue.]

Monorail: A One-Track Controversy

May 9, 1964—A wealthy Swedish industrialist named Axel Wenner-Gren dreamed of revolutionizing public transportation with dozens of Alweg—a contraction of his name—monorail systems in cities all over the world. As it turned out, Wenner-Gren had to settle for considerably less. His first and only commercial sale was to Disneyland, U.S.A, but he died before this line—five-eighths’ scale and recently lengthened to 2.5 miles—was completed.

Since its founder’s death, Alweg—spurred by a slight, blond, fiftyish promoter named Sixton Holmquist—has stepped up its marketing efforts. Its major accomplishment thus far has been the highly successful Seattle line.

The Seattle monorail turned out to be successful beyond even the dreams of its promoters. The entire cost of building the line—$4.2 million—was recouped in six months. From then until June 3, 1963, when Alweg gave the monorail to the Civic Center Corp. of Seattle, the profits (Alweg won’t say how much) piled in.

The enthusiasm of Seattle toward its monorail is infectious. Typical is Paul Seibert, head of a downtown business association, who says. “We realize this is the Model T of monorail, but even so, it is a heck of a lot better than most of us anticipated. It’s our Eiffel Tower. People actually come all the way to Seattle just to ride the monorail.”

Such comments are heady stuff for the residents of Los Angeles, mired in traffic jams and money problems. They have been offered an alternate plan—but the cost is staggering. The M.T.A., which is charged with planning rapid transit for all of Los Angeles County, has proposed a “backbone” system that includes 19 miles of expensive subway (through heavily congested downtown areas), 38 miles of elevated track and seven miles of surface lines-all for conventional trains operating on steel rails. The total cost of the package is $649 million, requiring a yearly debt cost of $33 million—about $11 million more than could be expected to come in through the fare box.

Alweg, fresh from its Seattle triumph, proposed to build a 43-mile, $187.5 million monorail that would parallel three fourths of the M.T.A.’s proposed backbone route and would be financed by selling M.T.A. revenue bonds to private investors. The proposal, which was contingent upon obtaining the necessary rights-of-way, sounded highly attractive to Los Angeles taxpayers, who would theoretically get their new transit line without ponying up a cent of tax money.

But Ernest Gerlach, chief engineer of the M.T.A., believes without equivocation that monorails cannot do the job in Los Angeles.

“The monorail people,” he says, “are a solution looking around for a problem. The proper problem doesn’t show up very often. I think it probably did in Seattle and at Disneyland. But in planning a system for Los Angeles County, we have to build structures the citizens will accept. There are six different towns on our backbone route, and several of them simply said a flat ‘No’ to any overhead transit system on main streets of their town.”

Alweg’s man in Los Angeles, a lanky, articulate, no-nonsense public-relations man named William Ross—who, incidentally, is handling publicity for the Goldwater primary campaign in California—is bitter about the kiss-off given his company by the M.T.A.

“Sometimes I wonder,” he says, “if they really want to build a system. The basic question in Los Angeles was always: Do we go underground at huge expense to the taxpayers or do we go overhead with monorail with no taxes and the fare box carrying the freight? It was our hope that once our plan was considered acceptable we could go with the M.T.A. into each of the communities along the transit route and sell them on the merits of monorail. I think we could have pulled it off, but we never got the chance.”

Manhattan’s Daily Riot

New Yorkers on the subway in Manhattan.

 
 
With the help of Mayor Fiorello La Guardia, Maurice Zolotow, known more for his Broadway and Hollywood articles than transportation, describes how rapid transit came to define New York City in this excerpt from a 1945 article in the Post.

[See also: “The Looming Crisis in Mass Transit” from our Jul/Aug 2012 issue.]

Manhattan’s Daily Riot

New Yorkers crowding into the subway at Times Square.

March 10, 1945—Anything and everybody can happen on the subway in New York. Like the Bowery in the old song, the subway is today the place where they do strange things and they say strange things.

For the visitor, the subway is a bewildering experience. His eyes will be confused by the murky yellowish dimness. His ears will be racked by the crashing, clashing, grating cacophony of the trains grinding against the tracks, a noise that is magnified into thunderous reverberations by the low tunnels.

But millions of New Yorkers stolidly ride the subway to and from their jobs, and they travel—many of them standing up—an average of eighty minutes a day. The New Yorker would be perplexed if the noise and the mobs were to vanish.

As Mayor La Guardia puts it, “New York didn’t build the subways. The subways built New York.” Then he tells you that Queens was just a cow country until the subway system was extended there, and that suddenly the population quadrupled, real-estate values boomed, small civic centers grew up around each subway station, schools were built and paving laid, and apartment houses and stores and churches sprang up.

When the IRT [Interborough Rapid Transit], first of the New York subways, opened in 1904, New Yorkers greeted the new vehicles with a mixture of enthusiasm, curiosity, and fear. A hundred thousand passengers rode the IRT on opening day, and many uproariously traveled back and forth all day, just for sheer pleasure.

New York City citizens crowd the subway stairs.La Guardia sits in his office in City Hall and smiles gently when you ask him about crowds in the subway during rush hour. He has been a subway rider himself for a long time. He points to a wall map of New York City. The map is veined by the subway lines. The mayor leans back in his chair and darts his fingers at the map.

“Let me tell you this,” he says:

“Any time we don’t have crowding during the rush hour, there’ll be a receiver sitting in the mayor’s chair and New York will be a ghost town. Why, they talk about the rush hours and the crush and the noise! Why, listen, don’t you see that’s the proof of our life and vitality? Why—why, that is New York City.”

For the Love of Streetcars

Streetcar in Cincinnati, Ohio.Peter Kocan—with editor Ashley Halsey, Jr.—describes a purist’s love for the streetcar.

Kocan, enthralled with the streetcar, took a 14,300-mile journey on 92 systems throughout the United States. The following excerpt is a bit of this extraordinary journey from a 1947 article in the Post. Three of the cities mentioned in this excerpt still have working streetcars today.

[See also: “The Looming Crisis in Mass Transit” from our Jul/Aug 2012 issue.]

Some of My Best Friends Are Streetcars

December 6, 1947—I began on April Fool’s Day of 1946 after getting out of the Army, which had isolated me on a streetcar-less corner of the island of Ceylon in the Indian Ocean. After landing in San Francisco, I went east to my home in New York and then started out on a transcontinental junket that took me south; west and east again through forty-five cities.

Portland, Oregon, trolley.
This traction wonder went up 1038 feet of mountainside to Council Crest Park in Portland, Oregon.

There are only 10 systems in the country that I haven’t ridden, and three of those are small interurbans. My mileage on the tour would have been even higher except for that strike in Los Angeles, which began two days before I arrived there. As the strike kept on, my funds ran low. I finally gave up, but not before setting what may be a world’s record. For eleven days I waited in vain for a streetcar.

Before leaving Southern California, I rode perhaps the chummiest streetcar line in the world-one that very nearly yanks its passengers aboard by the coat collar and helps them to seats. This is the Santa Monica Airline, which treats every straphanger like a stockholder. Despite its high-flown name, the Airline spends much of its time rambling through industrial back yards and darting cautiously across intersections to the shelter of the next alley.

The line is strictly a silent partner in the Pacific Electric Railway, described as the largest interurban system on earth. It does not appear on timetables, is never advertised, and makes only one round trip a day, to hold its franchise.

People riding streetcar.
The attractions of this nine-bench vehicle included cross-ventilation.

The same motorman, “Brownie,” has operated its entire rolling stock for years. He believes in giving individual service. While I was on his car, we halted at a corner. Minutes passed. Nobody got on or off.

“Why have we stopped?” somebody asked.

“Mr. Robinson usually gets on here,” Brownie explained. Sure enough, in a couple of minutes Mr. Robinson came tearing around the corner. One regular woman passenger failed to show up at all, however, and Brownie got worried. “Maybe she’s sick,” he fretted. “I certainly hope not. She’s a fine woman.”

Another traction wonder of the West Coast is a trolley route at Portland, Oregon, which spins the traveler through nearly ten complete circles in two and a third miles. There are sixty-seven merry-go-round curves, or an average of one every 180 feet. The trolley shoots up 1038 feet of mountainside to Council Crest Park along grades sometimes as steep as 12 per cent. To check the cars on their dizzy downward trip, the Portland Traction Company has thoughtfully installed ten derailing switches. Each automatically halts cars for nine seconds.

For truly fancy performances in the field of transit, no place on earth can beat Fort Collins, Colorado, smallest town in the United States to boast a trolley system. The town, population 12,250, owns five streetcars and holds two of them in reserve, It operates three at a time on its three single tracked lines: a large loop through the main section of town, a small loop on the other side of town, and a long connecting line.

If each streetcar stuck to its own back yard, the Fort Collins traction system would be as humdrum as any stay-at-home. To give the longest possible ride for the money, however, the city fathers decreed that two cars should serve both loops via the connecting line while the third circles the large loop. Since these complex gyrations are performed on a single-track system, they might be expected to constitute a triple threat to the future of the streetcar.

Trolleys of Fort Collins, Colorado.
In 1947, Fort Collins, Colorado, was the smallest U.S. town to boast a trolley system.

Fort Collins solves all its safety, switching and passenger-transfer problems, however, with one ingenious small-town stunt. Every twenty minutes all three trolleys in use confront one another in the town square just a few feet short of a collision. Anyone that arrives ahead of schedule has to wait. At the proper moment, the three motormen exchange greetings and drive ahead. Just as a triple collision of catastrophic proportions seems inevitable, the cars swerve and narrowly pass one another on a wye track in the town square. Big-city folks may compare this comedy act with Toonerville Trolley antics, but the municipally owned Fort Collins system holds two impressive distinctions. It has the lowest trolley fares in the country—five cents a ride, six tokens for a quarter or one dollar for an unlimited monthly pass—and it operates at a profit.