Jump to content


Photo

Conway Stewart - the true history


  • Please log in to reply
169 replies to this topic

#1 AndyR

AndyR

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 526 posts

Posted 20 June 2013 - 09:44 PM

In response to suggestions from (in particular) Deb and Jon, I have now posted a short (but true) history of Conway Stewart as we understand it today within my Dropbox public folder. You can access the pdf file here

I have followed the basic format of the Wikipedia entry (apparently posted by Mary Burke in 2007) as far as possible so you can print them out and compare the two side by side if desired. I have not amended the section on the models post 1990 as I am happy to admit that Mary knows more about these pens than I do, though I would like to know which of the Conway Stewart pens of this era were produced in celluloid as the Wikipedia entry states. Casein and acrylic resin certainly, but not celluloid as far as I am aware!

Andy

#2 Hugh

Hugh

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 1,878 posts
  • LocationNorthern NSW, Australia

Posted 21 June 2013 - 02:49 AM

Thanks Andy !! Now this needs to be pinned....

Regards
Hugh
Hugh Cordingley

#3 JonSzanto

JonSzanto

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 1,021 posts

Posted 21 June 2013 - 07:29 AM

Thank you, Andy. I'll download it and read it during lulls at rehearsals. I want you to know that this has all insinuated itself deeply into my psyche, and after the courtesy of some guidance from Hugh, I now own my first vintage CS, a nice blue/black marble No. 58 from 1952. Lovely little pen. I hope like hell this isn't the start of yet another obsession! :)

#4 AndyR

AndyR

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 526 posts

Posted 21 June 2013 - 08:19 AM

Excellent Jon, I'm very pleased to welcome you to the CS collectors clan so you can see what all the fuss was about!

An early 58 is the perfect start. Of the pens of the 1950s I would say a 100 should be your next one - the biggest of the post war pens but only available in black. Then possibly something in a herringbone - perhaps a 77, similar to a 58 but slightly larger. Then when you are hooked that far, I might cheekily again suggest purchasing the book, so you can see where to go next! One advantage of the printed paper approach is that all 600 or so of the pen images are life size so you can directly compare sizes of pens. More difficult to do online I should think and Jonathan's site doesn't generally offer barrel diameters which is one of the most important measurements to many. But I do suggest you don't make the mistake of many collectors in not thinking past pens of the 1950s. Pens from the 20s and 30s are fantastic and usable, nibs seem to generally have more flex and they are no harder to service or maintain than those of the 50s.

As a source of pens, until you know exactly what to look for and what pitfalls to avoid, may I suggest my friend Barry Rose's website as a good place to buy pens Writetime CS page , also a nice place just to go window shopping! His pens are reasonably priced (often cheaper than ebay) and ready to use. He is a fairly frequent visitor to the US and he has a bank account over there so you can pay him in US$ if that makes things easier. He is also a very decent bloke, respected throughout the pen collecting community, and he will be happy to advise you if you have any questions. He also happens to have the best Conway Stewart collection in the world! I know Deb also sells a few restored CS pens from her sales site, her prices are good and I'm sure her advice would be too!

Andy

#5 JonSzanto

JonSzanto

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 1,021 posts

Posted 21 June 2013 - 08:33 AM

Cheers, Andy!




Oh, wait, you're just being a pimp now... Posted Image


Oddly enough, I figured it might be about 3 pens before I went into the book. But, hey, I'm not Mr.Moneybags or anything, and I have hopes of one particular purchase before year is out that I have to put priority on. I do appreciate the info, and will bookmark Barry's site. I've got my eye on a couple herringbones right now, but they might go out of my range before end of auction.

This is sick, yanno... :)

#6 Deb

Deb

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 295 posts

Posted 21 June 2013 - 10:11 AM

Great work, Andy. Many thanks for making that available. I've noted it in my blog.

Jon, I second what Andy has to say about Barry Rose. A very fine gentleman who sells his pens at very good prices.

#7 AndyR

AndyR

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 526 posts

Posted 21 June 2013 - 10:31 AM

Oh, wait, you're just being a pimp now... Posted Image

I might possibly prefer the word 'enabler' but I know what you mean (and no offence taken)!!!

Mind you, 'penpimp' would make a great user name (though I doubt it would get through the filters on FPN)!

Andy


#8 Peterg

Peterg

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 130 posts

Posted 21 June 2013 - 01:24 PM

My only questions are whether the Golden Age extended through to the 1950s when they produced pens with some a very desirable finishes. Personally I'm not attracted to the updated models (got to draw the line somewhere) but I wouldn't dismiss them.

Also, I thought acrylic resin was only used by the modern CS company.

#9 AndyR

AndyR

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 526 posts

Posted 21 June 2013 - 02:11 PM

My only questions are whether the Golden Age extended through to the 1950s when they produced pens with some a very desirable finishes. Personally I'm not attracted to the updated models (got to draw the line somewhere) but I wouldn't dismiss them.

Also, I thought acrylic resin was only used by the modern CS company.

Hi Peter,

I think you possibly misread my first post, sorry if it wasn't clear for any reason - certainly the original CS company never used acrylic resin, I mentioned the resin material only in connection with the section '1990s to present' in the original Wikipedia entry, which claimed that the modern company also used celluloid and I don't think this is correct. Don Yendle's first pens when he resurrected the company name were based on the traditional model 58 (but larger) and the first ones were all produced in attractive coloured casein materials, such as the Tiffanys. When casein proved too expensive for much of the market, the cheaper resin materials were soon introduced. If any of this is incorrect, I'd be grateful if Mary Burke would join in here and put me right on the 'post 1997' pens, the aim is to get all the facts correct as far as I can.

I don't think you can say the Golden Age of Conway Stewart extended to the 1950s because the pens of this era were all so similar and the range of colours was so much more limited than pre-war, though the introduction of first Tiger's eye and later the Herringbones did make things better. And you would certainly have to say the 1940s weren't 'Golden' in any way when, in the aftermath of the war, the model range was very restricted and the materials were uninspiring. But of course, they could only use the materials that were available to them at the time. In any case, the use of a term like 'Golden Age' is very subjective, though I think most serious CS collectors would pretty much agree with my suggestion. I wouldn't have referred to it at all had it not been used in the Wikipedia original.

Andy

#10 AndyR

AndyR

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 526 posts

Posted 21 June 2013 - 02:17 PM

Great work, Andy. Many thanks for making that available. I've noted it in my blog.

Anybody coming to this topic for the first time and wondering what all the fuss is about would do well to read Deb's take on this in her blog. She puts the 'case for the prosecution' very well!

Andy

#11 AndyR

AndyR

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 526 posts

Posted 21 June 2013 - 02:31 PM

Jon, I second what Andy has to say about Barry Rose. A very fine gentleman who sells his pens at very good prices.

I'm sure Barry would be much happier with Deb's summing up as a 'fine gentleman' rather than my 'decent bloke'! He is quite a famous person in the world of choral and religious music as well as the world of Conway Stewart. You can visit his personal website here if you are interested. I would say the picture on his home page is definitely from 'the Golden Age' of Barry Rose, though!

Andy


#12 Paul M

Paul M

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 140 posts

Posted 21 June 2013 - 07:58 PM


Jon, I second what Andy has to say about Barry Rose. A very fine gentleman who sells his pens at very good prices.

I'm sure Barry would be much happier with Deb's summing up as a 'fine gentleman' rather than my 'decent bloke'! He is quite a famous person in the world of choral and religious music as well as the world of Conway Stewart. You can visit his personal website here if you are interested. I would say the picture on his home page is definitely from 'the Golden Age' of Barry Rose, though!

Andy


Very Useful Andy!


I would say the picture on his home page is definitely from 'the Golden Age' of Barry Rose, though!

That is surely punching below the belt! LOL - I simple did not recognise him




#13 Hugh

Hugh

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 1,878 posts
  • LocationNorthern NSW, Australia

Posted 23 June 2013 - 10:57 AM

Bit harsh on the post war pens !! I think the '50's pens pretty good with a decent range of colours and models. The 58 was an iconic British pen, and probably the iconic CS model regardless of era. It is fair to say that the likes of Parker and Sheaffer left CS ( and MT, Onoto) looking rather "old school" with the 51 and Snorkel, even Parkers Newhaven offering in the Duofold range was a bit ordinary compared to the US offerings.

Regards
Hugh
Hugh Cordingley

#14 AndyR

AndyR

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 526 posts

Posted 23 June 2013 - 11:57 AM

Harsh, maybe, but, as I admitted, a personal opinion! As I said, the term 'Golden Age' is always going to be subjective and I'm not going grumble (much!) about anyone who disagrees. I wish I had never mentioned the phrase but, as I said, it was used in the Wikipedia original - and I do feel that those who think the 50s were the golden age possibly only do so because they are not so familiar with the earlier achievements and breadth of the range of the company's pre-war pens.

I think you hit it on the head by saying the 1950s left the British industry generally looking very conservative. Other than the introduction of the herringbone materials and maybe (ironically) the introduction of injection moulded pens, Conway Stewart didn't introduce any technical innovations after the war. The 58/60 may be iconic British pens of the era but only because the competition was not very exciting either. In my interpretation of the golden age, it is often forgotten that CS patented a button operated presser bar filling system in 1927, though they didn't use the system themselves until 1933, they licensed the system exclusively to Parker for 5 years. As they fitted out the larger Shoe Lane factory, they ensured they used the state of the art machinery of the time. CS were pioneers in the introduction of colour and the use of colour in marketing (De La Rue were years behind). If you look at the range of different sizes and colours available in the 20s & 30s (yes, back to the printed book here!) they are far more varied and vibrant than those of the 50s.This probably just reflects the general austerity of the time in Britain and these pens can't be viewed without realizing the context. The 50s in Britain were generally pretty grim. So in my view, the 58 was an achievement, certainly, but not really part of a golden age.

Andy

#15 Hugh

Hugh

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 1,878 posts
  • LocationNorthern NSW, Australia

Posted 24 June 2013 - 11:15 AM

Hi Andy,

I think you may have taken what I said a bit out of my intended context. Little doubt as far as model range and colours the '30's was universally far more productive than the '50s be it CS, MT, Parker, Sheaffer, Eversharp or Wearever ( to name a few). Still this shouldn't detract from the post war models that stand on their own merits, a lot of '30's Parker Vacs are more spectacular than their '50's relatives and even more so in the case of Eversharp, likewise Sheaffers '50's pens are fairly pedestrian looks wise to their earlier pens. Still most would name the Parker 51 and the Sheaffer Snorkel as the iconic models from those makers, The CS 58 falls into the same category and while I'm only a CS novice the 58 is the first model that comes to mind when CS is mentioned. I guess what I'm trying to say is that "iconic" models really is what most people ( rightly or wrongly) associate with a company.

I also think a lot of the '50's pens are better user pens. The late '40's/'50's Swan pens are a prime example, you couldn't make pens like the 3xxx series in a more boring, dull range of colours ( and that's stretching it as your flat out telling the difference in colour under anything less than a 100W halogen ) yet they're well made and beautiful user pens.

Regards
Hugh
Hugh Cordingley

#16 AndyR

AndyR

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 526 posts

Posted 24 June 2013 - 11:35 AM

Hi Hugh,

I'm not sure we are actually differing here, except maybe how we interpret the terms 'golden age' and 'iconic'. I would absolutely agree that the 58 is an iconic pen, a very good user pen and probably the pen most people think of when they think of vintage CS. However, as one swallow doesn't make a summer, does one pen make a golden age?

Andy

(Still regretting using that phrase......)

(edited because I got my seasons wrong - summer, not spring as I originally wrote!)

Edited by AndyR, 24 June 2013 - 08:41 PM.


#17 Hugh

Hugh

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 1,878 posts
  • LocationNorthern NSW, Australia

Posted 25 June 2013 - 11:12 AM

Hi Andy,

I'm quiet happy for the '30's to be considered the "golden age" not only for CS but the FP industry. The introduction of the BP did in effect signal the "beginning of the end" and the start of a "new order". While few would disagree that the 30's provided the widest range of models and colours ever seen it should be noted this was the depth of the great depression that's an illustration of both the survival instinct of the makers and cheap labour that led to these stunning products. Fact is those 30's "wonder" where born into particularly difficult times where every effort was made to create a product that sold, "golden era" maybe but a very hard period. On the other hand the 50's was the start of generally fairly prosperous times yet most FPs where rather conservative in colour and style yet such pens as the Parker 51 was probably the most advanced design ever seen as far as delivering ink to paper and the Sheaffer Snorkel the most advanced engineering ever seen to get the ink into the pen. In comparison the Brits where behind the 8 ball.

On terminology, such terms as "iconic" are rather "loose" as no doubt the seasoned collector will view it differently than the more casual "fan" may. While as you say on swallow doesn't make a summer ( btw the little buggers hang around here till near the beginning of winter and seem to return in early spring....I like then as a bird but hate their desire to build nests around my house!!) the 50's did deliver some fairly remarkable advances with pens and the fact CS managed to remain competitive where the likes of MT and Onoto didn't is a remarkable achievement that needs to recognized as such. As such I think CSs 50's output did defy the odds to a degree and sales supported their product, maybe not a "golden era" but certainly an achievement in it's own right.

Regards
Hugh
Hugh Cordingley

#18 maryburke

maryburke

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • LocationWashington State, USA

Posted 25 June 2013 - 07:50 PM

In response to suggestions from (in particular) Deb and Jon, I have now posted a short (but true) history of Conway Stewart as we understand it today within my Dropbox public folder. You can access the pdf file here

I have followed the basic format of the Wikipedia entry (apparently posted by Mary Burke in 2007) as far as possible so you can print them out and compare the two side by side if desired. I have not amended the section on the models post 1990 as I am happy to admit that Mary knows more about these pens than I do, though I would like to know which of the Conway Stewart pens of this era were produced in celluloid as the Wikipedia entry states. Casein and acrylic resin certainly, but not celluloid as far as I am aware!

Andy


Dear Andy,

I have mentioned this many times, and it appears that I need to do again. The information I used for the history of CS back in 2007 was taken from Lambrou's books. When Iworked for Classic Pens, and during the publishing of FPOTW and FP: USA &UK, Lambrou liaised with many historians for the relevant pen brands, and he did run past the history of CS to several well-heeled pen collectors in the UKas well as Don Yendle when CS purchased a special edition cover for the company.

Since Lambrou's books were published, Stephen Hull has made a significant investment in time and money, which has resulted in finding and publishing new information and updating previously published information through his extensive research. If you have personal issues with my original Wikipedia entry (which BTW has been changed by others since I created the original page) may I please kindly suggest that you should be questioning Lambrou's research skills and data because his books were the source I used for the historical information.

I respect Stephen Hull's works and showed support of his new title by arranging with Conway Stewart for two new LE editions, Celebration Churchill and Celebration Wellington edition gift sets. When sold through our Collector's Club, each pen was accompanied with a signed copy of Stephen’s book, 'Fountain Pens for the Millions'. I have also arranged for Stephen's book to be sold through the Conway Stewart website.

Stephen's book is always on my desk, and it is the reference works I now use for when searching for historical information about CS.


Regards,

Mary Burke


Edited by maryburke, 25 June 2013 - 07:53 PM.


#19 AndyR

AndyR

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 526 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:42 PM


In response to suggestions from (in particular) Deb and Jon, I have now posted a short (but true) history of Conway Stewart as we understand it today within my Dropbox public folder. You can access the pdf file here

I have followed the basic format of the Wikipedia entry (apparently posted by Mary Burke in 2007) as far as possible so you can print them out and compare the two side by side if desired. I have not amended the section on the models post 1990 as I am happy to admit that Mary knows more about these pens than I do, though I would like to know which of the Conway Stewart pens of this era were produced in celluloid as the Wikipedia entry states. Casein and acrylic resin certainly, but not celluloid as far as I am aware!

Andy


Dear Andy,

I have mentioned this many times, and it appears that I need to do again. The information I used for the history of CS back in 2007 was taken from Lambrou's books. When Iworked for Classic Pens, and during the publishing of FPOTW and FP: USA &UK, Lambrou liaised with many historians for the relevant pen brands, and he did run past the history of CS to several well-heeled pen collectors in the UKas well as Don Yendle when CS purchased a special edition cover for the company.

Since Lambrou's books were published, Stephen Hull has made a significant investment in time and money, which has resulted in finding and publishing new information and updating previously published information through his extensive research. If you have personal issues with my original Wikipedia entry (which BTW has been changed by others since I created the original page) may I please kindly suggest that you should be questioning Lambrou's research skills and data because his books were the source I used for the historical information.

I respect Stephen Hull's works and showed support of his new title by arranging with Conway Stewart for two new LE editions, Celebration Churchill and Celebration Wellington edition gift sets. When sold through our Collector's Club, each pen was accompanied with a signed copy of Stephen’s book, 'Fountain Pens for the Millions'. I have also arranged for Stephen's book to be sold through the Conway Stewart website.

Stephen's book is always on my desk, and it is the reference works I now use for when searching for historical information about CS.


Regards,

Mary Burke


Mary,

I am delighted you have finally decided to post here and I hope you continue to do so. As I said in my e-mail to you a year ago, I'm sure you will be welcome to post whatever you want here regarding Conway Stewart without fear of censorship. I wasn't aware you had mentioned the source of your information many times, I hadn't seen any of these so I'm sorry if I somehow missed them but my intention is not to embarrass you, my only concern is in establishing the accuracy of any history of CS as promoted online. I do however have all three of Lambrou's books that cover the UK industry and I duly note the text you refer to.

We should recognise that research moves on and knowledge generally increases with time. Andy Lambrous's research may have been state of the art in 1998 when FPOTW was published and errors in the WIkipedia entry based upon this in 2007 would be excusable as nothing different had been published in the interim. However, things had moved on by the time your 2012 CS brochure was produced and you had already had access to copies of Steve's carefully researched book (FPFTM) for over a year at that time - but it seems you still preferred the Lambrou version as the basis for your brochure. Steve is an extremely good friend of mine and if you read his 'Acknowledgements' you'll no doubt realize how closely we co-operated on his book - and we both know he was equally mystified and frustrated by your decision to go with the version of history you published in last year's brochure.

You may or may not be aware that the apparent source of most of this mis-information regarding the early history of CS would appear to be a Mr. Quilter, a former employee of CS who claimed to be a nephew of Harry Burnham (something I am in no position at present to prove or disprove). Unfortunately, none of Mr Quilter's pronouncements appear to have stood the test of further investigation.

If anything I have written in my version of the history of CS is proved to be wrong, now or at any time in the future, I will be happy to amend my text accordingly.

Andy

Edited by AndyR, 25 June 2013 - 09:58 PM.


#20 Hugh

Hugh

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 1,878 posts
  • LocationNorthern NSW, Australia

Posted 25 June 2013 - 10:14 PM

Dear Mary,
Well wonders never cease !! At least you've taken the opportunity to pass comment, you will find this forum a more pleasant and less moderated one than the one you moderate. Openness and a certain degree of freedom of speech (everything has limits) are encouraged by the owner, David. I hope you take the opportunity to contribute on modern CS in the future.

Some long standing issues that I hope you take the time to respond to:

1. If you wrote the article you take responsibility for it and trying to "pass the buck" is rather a lame defense. If you use references that contain errors it's your fault , this is how history re-writes itself and factually incorrect material becomes "fact".

2. You seem to indicate a great respect for vintage CS and it's history in your post, why is this not evident in the FPN Forum you moderate ? A brief "correct" history as a pinned topic would be a start.

3. Again, why no pinned topics referring to vintage CS on the FPN ? While now out of date the " Book of Numbers" is a valuable resource.

4. Has CS at any point contributed financially to the FPN be it by donation, sponsorship , use of a third party or any other method where CS funds where transferred to the FPN or any person, company or entity connected with the FPN?

5. Conflict of interest has long been an issue raised with your involvement in the FPN CS forum. Is it appropriate for you to moderate that forum given your connection with CS ?

Regards
Hugh


Hugh Cordingley




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users