Comments
"Cut out head holes", so yes, I do think there were air holes. If the parents, or even the children themselves, were smart about how and where to cut those holes, of course. Which would not be a given today, and probably wasn't even back then. Still, at least back then the company could claim to have given all reasonably necessary instructions. Today, the parent of the toddler who suffocated because the parent itself forgot the air hole (or was too stupid to realise a toddler is smaller than a seven-year-old) would sue. Possibly even win, as well.
Posted by Richard Bos on 10/24/20 at 08:12 AM
They were likely paper.
In the days before poly bags, mom's blouses, my sisters' dresses, and my suit came back from the cleaners in white paper bags, heavier than tissue but thinner than typing paper. Dad's suits came back in brown bags similar to Kraft paper.
If you've ever seen an old wire hanger covered with paper advertising the dry cleaner, that was the same type of paper.
The shape shown in the picture suggests it couldn't have been poly.
In the days before poly bags, mom's blouses, my sisters' dresses, and my suit came back from the cleaners in white paper bags, heavier than tissue but thinner than typing paper. Dad's suits came back in brown bags similar to Kraft paper.
If you've ever seen an old wire hanger covered with paper advertising the dry cleaner, that was the same type of paper.
The shape shown in the picture suggests it couldn't have been poly.
Posted by Phideaux on 10/24/20 at 08:52 AM
I'm still trying to determine what kind of animal the lower one is supposed to represent. It has quite a pair of hangers.
Posted by KDP on 10/24/20 at 09:13 AM
I remember those, they were paper not plastic.
Posted by F.U.D in Stockholm on 10/24/20 at 12:46 PM
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DveMiNQifZcM&ved=2ahUKEwiv3p3j9c_sAhWQY98KHQvDCesQwqsBMAB6BAgBEAM&usg=AOvVaw19zGAocicB85bM1J2PV9qU
Posted by S. Norman on 10/25/20 at 10:17 AM
Lots of dry cleaners did this. Do a search and you'll see some pretty odd ones
Posted by S. Norman on 10/25/20 at 10:19 AM
@S.Norman: I believe you mean https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=veMiNQifZcM . Don't fall into the Google steal-your-browsing-history trap.
Posted by Richard Bos on 10/25/20 at 04:08 PM
KDP, the animal is a rabbit. A male rabbit. With a sleeveless jacket. God, the drawing's quality...
I long for the days when dry cleaners will revert to paper bags. All this plastic is not healthy for the environment. They already have "eco-cleaning", so why not paper bags?
I long for the days when dry cleaners will revert to paper bags. All this plastic is not healthy for the environment. They already have "eco-cleaning", so why not paper bags?
Posted by Yudith on 10/27/20 at 05:44 AM
@Yudith -- You've hit on one of my biggest peeves: "everyone knows" plastics are inherently bad, but actually, they're often better for the environment.
It takes nearly twice as much energy to make a ton of paper than to make a ton of plastic, and you have to factor in how much heavier paper is than poly film. You also have to take into consideration that simply getting the material to the factory site is far more efficient for plastic (pipeline) than for paper (trucks).
It takes 22 gallons of water to make a pound of plastic versus 86 gallons for paper, and again, you have to account for how much heavier paper is than plastic. Recycling paper only saves about 3.5 gallons.
Crumple up a sheet of paper and then a piece of poly the same size. The plastic is obviously much smaller. Paper makes up 1/4 of all landfill waste, and when it breaks down, it produces methane, which is many times worse for the environment than carbon dioxide. The fact that plastic doesn't significantly break down means it'll wait patiently for recovery technology to further develop which will allow 'mining' of landfills for energy and material content.
When you add in the other advantages of plastic over paper (more sanitary, less storage space, etc. etc. etc.), poly film is clearly much better for the environment, and people, than paper.
https://www.theworldcounts.com/stories/Paper-Waste-Facts
https://www.watercalculator.org/footprint/the-hidden-water-in-everyday-products/
It takes nearly twice as much energy to make a ton of paper than to make a ton of plastic, and you have to factor in how much heavier paper is than poly film. You also have to take into consideration that simply getting the material to the factory site is far more efficient for plastic (pipeline) than for paper (trucks).
It takes 22 gallons of water to make a pound of plastic versus 86 gallons for paper, and again, you have to account for how much heavier paper is than plastic. Recycling paper only saves about 3.5 gallons.
Crumple up a sheet of paper and then a piece of poly the same size. The plastic is obviously much smaller. Paper makes up 1/4 of all landfill waste, and when it breaks down, it produces methane, which is many times worse for the environment than carbon dioxide. The fact that plastic doesn't significantly break down means it'll wait patiently for recovery technology to further develop which will allow 'mining' of landfills for energy and material content.
When you add in the other advantages of plastic over paper (more sanitary, less storage space, etc. etc. etc.), poly film is clearly much better for the environment, and people, than paper.
https://www.theworldcounts.com/stories/Paper-Waste-Facts
https://www.watercalculator.org/footprint/the-hidden-water-in-everyday-products/
Posted by Phideaux on 10/27/20 at 08:15 AM
@Phideaux: if paper makes up any percentage of your landfill waste, you're doing it wrong. Paper can be either recycled or burned for energy. Plastic can... well, I suppose you could burn it, but the dioxins produced by that are not nice.
No, the real reason paper bags are often not better than plastic is that high-quality plastic bags can be re-used much more often than paper ones can, and therefore take (in the gross) a lot less energy. The problem with that theoretical possibility is a. producers and shops have no incentive at all to make their bags durable, and more importantly b. I'm afraid your average consumer is too effing stupid not to throw her bags in the bin as soon as she gets home.
No, the real reason paper bags are often not better than plastic is that high-quality plastic bags can be re-used much more often than paper ones can, and therefore take (in the gross) a lot less energy. The problem with that theoretical possibility is a. producers and shops have no incentive at all to make their bags durable, and more importantly b. I'm afraid your average consumer is too effing stupid not to throw her bags in the bin as soon as she gets home.
Posted by Richard Bos on 10/28/20 at 12:13 PM
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.
Category: Death | Movies | Children | 1950s