35 replies to this topic

[david i]

One more question. David wrote "The term "Duovac" I fear is nonspecific in the hobby." Does this mean that if I go around calling my lovely little red striped Duofold a Duovac, no one will say anything to my face, but after I walk by, they will exchange knowing glances?

Too late. They already have done so

The striped pens overwhelmingly are Duofolds. They are so marked. They are so catalogued. Yeah, some use the Vacumatic filling system, but then so do some Parker 51's, and we don't call those 51-o-Vacs.

As per this thread, there are some relatively scarce pens done in shape and color of the striped Duofolds, but packing Vacumatic markings, metal, and special cap-band, but those are Vacumatics, and describing them as "Vacumatic in Duofold plastic" is fine. A collector term for off-catalogue Vacs done essentially as striped Duofolds is... Vacufold. While not original Parker nomenclature, the Vacufold references specifically Duofold style pens done as Vacumatic.

Using "Duovac" for the 99% of pens that are just catalogued Duofolds is... inelegant at best.

It distracts from what the pens are, somewhat trivializing them, or at least trivializing the hobby knowledge, which should be pretty clear about what these are. It sometimes is used by ebay sellers who just don't know the series, or who wish to muddle things by adding either imagined extra cachet or by linking the pens to the true Vacumatics done in this style (Vacufold), which again are fairly scarce.

Part of the confusion perhaps stems from Duofold being the only Parker from the 1930's-1940's being offered at length in parallel with two different filling systems. Generally, the button-filler Duofolds are lower line than the Vac-fill Duofolds.

Not sure all this helps...

-d

[Marsilius]

1367288800[/url]' post='24281']

1367288148[/url]' post='24280']
One more question. David wrote "The term "Duovac" I fear is nonspecific in the hobby." Does this mean that if I go around calling my lovely little red striped Duofold a Duovac, no one will say anything to my face, but after I walk by, they will exchange knowing glances?

Too late. They already have done so

The striped pens overwhelmingly are Duofolds. They are so marked. They are so catalogued. Yeah, some use the Vacumatic filling system, but then so do some Parker 51's, and we don't call those 51-o-Vacs.

As per this thread, there are some relatively scarce pens done in shape and color of the striped Duofolds, but packing Vacumatic markings, metal, and special cap-band, but those are Vacumatics, and describing them as "Vacumatic in Duofold plastic" is fine. A collector term for off-catalogue Vacs done essentially as striped Duofolds is... Vacufold. While not original Parker nomenclature, the Vacufold references specifically Duofold style pens done as Vacumatic.

Using "Duovac" for the 99% of pens that are just catalogued Duofolds is... inelegant at best.

It distracts from what the pens are, somewhat trivializing them, or at least trivializing the hobby knowledge, which should be pretty clear about what these are. It sometimes is used by ebay sellers who just don't know the series, or who wish to muddle things by adding either imagined extra cachet or by linking the pens to the true Vacumatics done in this style (Vacufold), which again are fairly scarce.

Part of the confusion perhaps stems from Duofold being the only Parker from the 1930's-1940's being offered at length in parallel with two different filling systems. Generally, the button-filler Duofolds are lower line than the Vac-fill Duofolds.

Not sure all this helps...

-d

So if I understand, a paradox: Had I looked here, http://parkerpens.net/duovac.html, I would have avoided my first piker's mistake and would have identified the Vacumatic. But I would have still called it a Duovac. Or did I still miss something?Of course you will know when we meet in person, because I will come up to show you my Duovac!Ok, enough swimming in over my head for the day!

[david i]

So if I understand, a paradox: Had I looked here, http://parkerpens.net/duovac.html, I would have avoided my first piker's mistake and would have identified the Vacumatic. But I would have still called it a Duovac. Or did I still miss something?Of course you will know when we meet in person, because I will come up to show you my Duovac!Ok, enough swimming in over my head for the day!

Tony is a good guy, and his website is a great resource, but he might be projecting a bit when he notes, "It was replaced in 1940 by the Duofold Vacumatic, among collectors often referred to as the Duovac"

Though, with more non-collectors calling these Duovacs, maybe this is the source of that error.

Still, perhaps I should encourage the error. Then when Vacumatics-in-Duofold-Garb (Vacufolds) do show up on ebay, the typical collector will be so befuddled differentiating Vacufold from Duovac that my competition will stutter instead of bid

My suggesting is to avoid the term, "Duovac" like the plague. Unless, maybe, we want to start to call the 1921-1939 pens Duobutts and modern pens Duocarts etc...

regards

d

[Procyon]

Maybe I am missing the point here, but it seems to me that "Duovac" is every bit as good as "Vacufold", as a description, if you are talking about the pens that have the vacumatic imprint and the arrow clip. Granted, I call my striped Duofolds just that - striped Duofolds. And, as far as i'm concerned, I don't own any Duovacs or Vacufolds - alhough, I wish I did.

[david i]

Maybe I am missing the point here, but it seems to me that "Duovac" is every bit as good as "Vacufold", as a description, if you are talking about the pens that have the vacumatic imprint and the arrow clip. Granted, I call my striped Duofolds just that - striped Duofolds. And, as far as i'm concerned, I don't own any Duovacs or Vacufolds - alhough, I wish I did.

Hi Allan,

That the two terms reference two different series (albeit similarly looking) yet are starting to be used interchangeably causeng further confusion perhaps because the term (duovac) is nonspecific (I'm seeing it pop up now for the Vacumatic not just the Duofold, which then is it or which will it be?) and that that the term indeed is redundant and unnecessary all are good reasons to dispense with it. I have yet to see anyone call any pens from the series Duobutts, afterall.

regards

david

[BrianMcQueen]

Maybe I am missing the point here, but it seems to me that "Duovac" is every bit as good as "Vacufold", as a description, if you are talking about the pens that have the vacumatic imprint and the arrow clip. Granted, I call my striped Duofolds just that - striped Duofolds. And, as far as i'm concerned, I don't own any Duovacs or Vacufolds - alhough, I wish I did.

I don't think there would be a problem if both "Douvac" and "Vacufold" referred to the Vacumatic done in Duofold Plastic. However, what we see is that "Duovac" is being used for ALL striped Duofolds, regardless of actual filling system. Remember, there are some that have a vacumatic filling system, and some that have a button filler. It kind of diminishes the line as a whole to call them "Duovacs" when they indeed have a proper name, "Duofold." To save confusion, you should say "Striped Duofold" to distinguish that you mean the Duofolds made in the 40s, and not one from any other series. Same as we do for "Vacumatic 51" and "Aerometric 51."

As a side note, I don't really like either of the terms "Duovac" or "Vacufold."

[Marsilius]

So, who invented the term Duovac?

[david i]

So, who invented the term Duovac?

Might never know. Has it been casual (if inaccurate) parlance at length, finally written into a profile or two? You'd have to search for first claimed usage.

But, we might also ask who first said, "I like yous guys", "ain't that grand", "I may go to the show" and all sorts of other poor choices in English...

regards

d

[Marsilius]

Well, there might be a difference between bad grammar and wrong names. I deal with 15th-century terminology and etymologies; often the best or most common names are used with terrible inconsistency. Then, someone modern comes along and tries to standardize a term, which makes things consistent, but represent an ironically rare usage.It is a fascinating area in which people back then cite questionable authorities with various charming results, and we do the same today.This is starting to get interesting . . .

[david i]

Well, there might be a difference between bad grammar and wrong names. I deal with 15th-century terminology and etymologies; often the best or most common names are used with terrible inconsistency. Then, someone modern comes along and tries to standardize a term, which makes things consistent, but represent an ironically rare usage.It is a fascinating area in which people back then cite questionable authorities with various charming results, and we do the same today.This is starting to get interesting . . .

I agree. Jargon and Grammar are different processes, though I would assert the misuse of either can be appropriately painful to those sensitive to such things. Perhaps in that rests at least a parallel

But, at root, I remain with my core notion that Duovac suffers from inaccuracy, irrelevancy, and dysfunction. It does not specify. It demeans a high quality pen series by substituting a name with the features I've cites for an overwhelmingly accurate, proper and historic name, a name indeed stamped in every pen. And, I have yet to hear anyone tell me why we don't call pens from the same series, "Duobutts".

There simply is no reason to use the term, and good reasons exist not to.

regards

David

[Marsilius]

This well,mI am fascinated by the inconsistent use if terms as a concept, in which two terms mean one thing, and one of those terms means three other things. But more anon. In the mean time, David, just what s your problem with the term DouVac?Could it be this!?

[david i]

Too, perhaps I can add some historical context to the pens, to lend some support for my dislike of the term "Duovac", even while I am reasonably comfortable with another collector generated term for some pens that relate, that term being "Vacufold".

If one wishes to be meticulous and to (as we often say in Medicine), split rather than lump, one can find five different Parker pens from the USA that used what we call the Vacumatic filling system (taking name from the Parker Vacumatic, which used this plunger-diaphragm arrangement).

These include:

• Parker Golden Arrow
• Parker Vacuum Filler
• Parker Vacumatic
• Parker Duofold (striped, 1940's)
• Parker 51 (1941-1948)

We don't incorporate the name of the filling system ("Vacumatic" filler, "Vac-Fill" or even "plunger-diaphragm" or one I rather like, and created, "intussuscepted bulb filler") into the series name for any of the pens. We don't discuss the Parker Golden Arrovac or the Parker 51-o-vac. The pens have series names. We then specify filler where necessary. Golden Arrow and Vacuum Filler (predecessors to the Vacumatic, proper) and of course Vacumatic don't need the gross filling system specified. All pens use the Vac-fill system, though there are different types of vac-filler system over the years.


Parker 51 offered 2 filling systems sequentially (Vac-fill first, later Aerometric). Parker's striped 1940's Duofold offered two filling systems in parallel, which does add challenge. Once could buy cheaper button fill 1940's Duofolds or more pricey Vac-Fill Duofolds, but all the pens are Duofolds. They are catalogued as such (I have paper) and the pens are marked as such. "Duovac" is inaccurate enough that those who don't know much about the series are at risk to use the term for button fill striped Duofolds, as the pens look superficially similar, and, hey, why not, since we might reach point that "everyone" calls a striped Duofold a "Duovac". Soon we will have button-fill Duovacs...

Simply describing the pens as vac-fill (vs button-fill) striped Duofold is simpler, cleaner (if adding couple words) and more respectful of history and context.

Meanwhile there are some quite scarce pens that look like striped Duofolds but are marked Vacumatic, having special trim to differentiate the pens from the Duofolds, beyond just imprint difference. These pens are (so far) off catalogue, undocumented, limited to a few month production, not only using the plastic from striped Duofold, but having the shape of Duofold instead of the shape of Vacumatic. They are at some level Duofolds rebadged as Vacumatics, They are special pens that fit between (or blend, mix, fuse features from) two otherwise disparate and well defined series. Collectors indeed have come to call these Vacufold.

At first peek, Vacufold might seem the same sort of jargon as Duovac. Both are portmanteaus (mashups) of the two different series' names. But, beyond the argument to follow that Vacufold is... reasonable jargon, another reason I don't like Duovac (beyond all the points cited already) is that it is all too easy to confuse for the Vacufold, which I worry some people will... use to their advantage.

Vacufold makes some sense, even if it is a bit cute, as it represents a tiny minority of pens that truly blends major features from different series. Shape and color of Duofold, Imprint and trim of Vacumatic. Note that filling system I don't even cite, as it is common to both pens. Vacufold is a special, niche, and scarce. pen. Duovac is just... a Duofold. And when used casually it is not even clear if it representing a Duofold or a rare Vacumatic-that-looks-like-a-Duofold (the dread Vacufold).

Regards




david

[Marsilius]

Very cool, sir!And then we have DouVac vacuum cleaners!Seriously, thank you for the engaging history.
Best wishes,Mars

[david i]

This well,mI am fascinated by the inconsistent use if terms as a concept, in which two terms mean one thing, and one of those terms means three other things. But more anon. In the mean time, David, just what s your problem with the term DouVac?Could it be this!?

Well, those Duovacs have their charm (the cleaners).

d

[welch]

(1) I will call them "striped Duofold (with the vacumatic filling system)". If Mr. Parker wanted to call the pen a Duofold, that;s good enough. Adding the type of filling system seems unnecessary, but might be helpful. If I ever found one...which is unlikely.

(2) On the red marble Challenger that Parker seems to have made for another company, how could we have identified it without seeing the clip?

[david i]

(1) I will call them "striped Duofold (with the vacumatic filling system)". If Mr. Parker wanted to call the pen a Duofold, that;s good enough. Adding the type of filling system seems unnecessary, but might be helpful. If I ever found one...which is unlikely.

(2) On the red marble Challenger that Parker seems to have made for another company, how could we have identified it without seeing the clip?

Sans the imprint or clip, the top end-piece is a tell. The shape is different from Deluxe Challenger. Too, while "Clip" might be a bit nonspecific in this context, you don't need to see the front of the clip marked "Diamond Medal". The presence of a flat-washer clip (as with regular chellenger) on pen with the cap-band pattern (tripl.e) and color (plaque-on-black) of Deluxe Challenger (which should have a fat top metal piece as with Vacumatic), is a tell.

The red pen actually was "obvious" in the post, once one knows what to look for, which of course is the trick

Here is a four page detailed discussion of some of the Parker-for-Sears Diamond Medal pens. Read only if you have patience and curiosity, and are willing to compare pics back and forth. This could be redone as a significant book chapter. One day maybe I will do so...

Parker made for Sears: Focus on the Diamond Medal Vac-Fil

regards

Daivd