70 replies to this topic

[grandmia]

For the serious collector books are a waste of time unless you collect Parker or Waterman as the books are grossly inaccurate for anything else. You have to join the PCA and get copies of source catalogs, get good at searching the web for early ads (google books) and buy ephemera. If you just want superficial knowledge of pens companies that is what the books are good for - some info without having to make a study of these companies yourself.

Roger W.

That's a bold and sweeping statement and, while it may be true in some cases, it is an absurd generalisation. I have worked so far on only one book, 'Fountain Pens for the Millions, the history of Conway Stewart' (doing a lot of good research on behalf of the author) but I can assure you all the research for the book was original, thoroughly conducted in depth and a valuable contribution to ALL collectors of the brand, serious or casual. Not only did the research include searching the actual paper copies of the trade press spanning 70 years (no such luxury as being able to access them by Google books on this side of the Atlantic), the families of the founders of the company were involved and they made available lots of previously unpublished archive photographs. Former employees were also interviewed over a period of nearly 30 years. Nor was there ever any convenient company archive to refer to. I probably possess the most complete archive of pre-war Conway Stewart advertising and all of this was made available for publication for the first time in the book. So to denigrate all this as 'superficial knowledge' or 'grossly inaccurate' is just wrong.

Joining the PCA would be of no advantage to me as I am only interested in the British pen industry. While it is obvious most members of this board are only interested in American manufacturers, some would do well to remember that there was also an industry over here with a long and interesting history of its own. And I would also point out that Brandon's particular enquiry referred to a fairly obscure and short-lived English pen of the 1940s, the Homelink, which I would guess doesn't feature strongly in the PCA archive. For this reason I recommended the WES as a sensible next step.

Andy

Hi Andy

I am a big British pen fan.Give me an old vintage Onoto any day........

Sorry for the slight digression from the original subject as it is great to hear members openly speaking the truth about TFN. If more members had the balls to speak up for them selves then i am sure something would be done.................

[JonSzanto]

If more members had the balls to speak up for them selves then i am sure something would be done.................

Another incredibly naive statement, which already presupposes that people haven't spoken up (they/I have), or that they don't have balls. FPN (which I'm assuming, despite your calling it TFN) has a very large membership base, and always pulls in lots of newbies. There aren't anywhere nearly enough pissed off people to even begin to make them reconsider the way they run their site.

Sometimes it takes more brains than balls to create a better situation.

[Roger W.]

For the serious collector books are a waste of time unless you collect Parker or Waterman as the books are grossly inaccurate for anything else. You have to join the PCA and get copies of source catalogs, get good at searching the web for early ads (google books) and buy ephemera. If you just want superficial knowledge of pens companies that is what the books are good for - some info without having to make a study of these companies yourself.

Roger W.

That's a bold and sweeping statement and, while it may be true in some cases, it is an absurd generalisation. I have worked so far on only one book, 'Fountain Pens for the Millions, the history of Conway Stewart' (doing a lot of good research on behalf of the author) but I can assure you all the research for the book was original, thoroughly conducted in depth and a valuable contribution to ALL collectors of the brand, serious or casual. Not only did the research include searching the actual paper copies of the trade press spanning 70 years (no such luxury as being able to access them by Google books on this side of the Atlantic), the families of the founders of the company were involved and they made available lots of previously unpublished archive photographs. Former employees were also interviewed over a period of nearly 30 years. Nor was there ever any convenient company archive to refer to. I probably possess the most complete archive of pre-war Conway Stewart advertising and all of this was made available for publication for the first time in the book. So to denigrate all this as 'superficial knowledge' or 'grossly inaccurate' is just wrong.

Joining the PCA would be of no advantage to me as I am only interested in the British pen industry. While it is obvious most members of this board are only interested in American manufacturers, some would do well to remember that there was also an industry over here with a long and interesting history of its own. And I would also point out that Brandon's particular enquiry referred to a fairly obscure and short-lived English pen of the 1940s, the Homelink, which I would guess doesn't feature strongly in the PCA archive. For this reason I recommended the WES as a sensible next step.

Andy

Andy;

I was remiss to leave out WES. My statement is true in most cases as, to date, we have mostly general books which seem to take from the books before as we've known for years that rarely did Sheaffer use RHR but, they all say they are RHR (though we have seen a move away from this finally). That is Sheaffer one of the big four so forget about the inaccuracies on the small companies. Parker has some specific books which are good and I guess there is a good one on Conway Stewart (I wasn't familiar, sorry). By and large though we are still getting books that try to cover everything and badly or perhaps less badly each time but still badly. So I wasn't speaking to the Conway Stewart book but to the general pens of all manufacturer books which are largely Superficial and grossly inaccurate. If someone doesn't want to do the work to know about a company then they are a good source just not a great source and not the route I would take.

Roger W.

[grandmia]

If more members had the balls to speak up for them selves then i am sure something would be done.................

Another incredibly naive statement, which already presupposes that people haven't spoken up (they/I have), or that they don't have balls. FPN (which I'm assuming, despite your calling it TFN) has a very large membership base, and always pulls in lots of newbies. There aren't anywhere nearly enough pissed off people to even begin to make them reconsider the way they run their site.

Sometimes it takes more brains than balls to create a better situation.

What is so naive about people speaking up for them selves ? It is blatantly obvious on "FPN" . IF a new subject is posted there and it is criticised by the big guns then it receives deluge of replies from the rest of the pack all in agreement. The normal members or newbies are feared of posting a reply in case they disagree with them. So how can that be a balanced view on a subject ?

If the members were allowed to post there replies freely you would find totally different views on a lot of posts......

[JonSzanto]

What is so naive about people speaking up for them selves?

Nothing.

Oh, except for the part where you assume that it would lead to change (in this instance).

[opus7600]

What is so naive about people speaking up for them selves ? It is blatantly obvious on "FPN" . IF a new subject is posted there and it is criticised by the big guns then it receives deluge of replies from the rest of the pack all in agreement. The normal members or newbies are feared of posting a reply in case they disagree with them. So how can that be a balanced view on a subject ?

If the members were allowed to post there replies freely you would find totally different views on a lot of posts......

Good thing you managed to figure out what ALL the other people think, so you can be angry at them for failing to post it.

Besides the "brutal dictatorship" theory you have advanced, may I suggest an alternate theory of "nearly complete indifference"?

Edited by opus7600, 11 August 2012 - 10:55 AM.

[Hugh]

What is so naive about people speaking up for them selves ? It is blatantly obvious on "FPN" . IF a new subject is posted there and it is criticised by the big guns then it receives deluge of replies from the rest of the pack all in agreement. The normal members or newbies are feared of posting a reply in case they disagree with them. So how can that be a balanced view on a subject ?

If the members were allowed to post there replies freely you would find totally different views on a lot of posts......

Good thing you managed to figure out what ALL the other people think, so you can be angry at them for failing to post it.

Besides the "brutal dictatorship" theory you have advanced, may I suggest an alternate theory of "nearly complete indifference"?

You can suggest any theory you like !! The reality is that the FPN is more "brutal dictatorship" than "nearly complete indifference" if you step out of (their) lines and it's not a matter of what other people think it's how those that own it choose to run it ( one of the benefits that accrues from ownership). When your on the receiving end it's not nice but there's little point in getting too upset about it for the reason you can't do anything about it. I posted the OP more to highlight the (illogical) mindset at times of those running the FPN , as Jon said early on "it is what it is"...a fact whether it's fair, reasonable or unjust. Still the way some people are treated is indefensible, that too is fact.

Regards
Hugh

[Marsilius]

A few thoughts:

First: On dictatorship vs. indifference, the two are not mutually exclusive, I assume there are tons of psychological experiments and studies about how groups act to in ways that—as the Italians say—hammer down nails that stick out. I remember game from the 60s or 70s called "StarPower." I played it once, and won't give a spoiler here, but it did affect my view of human group behavior. It's worth a search on the net. It may seem unrelated to the topic, but if you have played it, the reference might resonate in this context.

Second: I notice a dichotomy between the desire to have a forum focused narrowly on expert collection on the one hand, and the statement that all types of people and discussions are welcome. I have a feeling that in the natural "policing" here, people would naturally ignore topics they deemed less than intriguing. I would feel silly posting a thread like "what pen do you enjoy eating with at dinner?" (and in case you were wondering, never use a pen as a fork).

Third: I have a soft spot in my heart for naïve resistance with the hope of change, despite a practical belief that it often doesn't work very well. As an artist, I prefer Glorious Failure to tame crafting, but in real time would probably prefer a tamely crafted pen to a lovely leaking disaster.

Best wishes to all,
Mars

[Roger W.]

Apparently you can discuss how ugly Lamys are to the point the topic gets closed. Admittedly, I did not read the OP. The premise that Lamys are ugly is a sound one with me as I was given a 2000 and only too happy to sell it. It did get 40 some posts so it was reasonably popular. Heck, I can't get two posts on historically significant Sheaffer pens - guess my posts will never raise enough controversy to get closed. I'm just thinking it would have eventually died on its own and not sure it needed help.

Roger W.

[FarmBoy]

And as as the honorary Lamy Forum Moderator they didn't even alert me to the decision to close the thread.

I wonder who got points in the aftermath.

EDIT: And for the record the only Safari I own says Esterbrook on it.

Edited by FarmBoy, 19 August 2012 - 06:24 AM.

[Frank(Federalist Pens)]

And as as the honorary Lamy Forum Moderator they didn't even alert me to the decision to close the thread.

I wonder who got points in the aftermath.

EDIT: And for the record the only Safari I own says Esterbrook on it.

LOL T!!

-Frank