169 replies to this topic

[JonSzanto]

Probably both for me, a car buff, and a Biff buff (lol that is hilarious) I do love back to the future! If I had a time machine Delorean, I would go back in time and buy a trunk load of vintage Conway Stewart's

And POW super moderator Rick gets us back on topic.....

You owe me a new keyboard, unless you know a good way to get cheap red wine out of one! Too funny...

[Rick Krantz]

Fountain pen board assumes no responsibility for personal loss or injury that may occur by using this forum.

[david i]

Nah, I don't see anything disproportionally rough. Strong views on loaded issues are to be expected...

The first statement is unsurprising. The second is beside the point: strong views are *not* the issue, but how they are proffered, as well as the simple courtesy of a genial welcome before diving in. We are all a little different in our manner and demeanor, I understand this. I also stand by my remark earlier, and I am glad to see Mary has not been dissuaded from discussion.

I keep open mind regarding perspectives. There are... so many

For example, different people see the proffering of strong views differently. So it goes...

But, Mary did not randomly join to chat about a random subject. The Conway-Stewart-- FPN connection is hot-button topic (for those who care about it) from the get go, and Mary is the Moderator of that Forum at FPN. The issues raised about that subject apparently have been erased when raised at FPN. Again, this chat appears not to entail mere random opinions in conflict about a random subject.

And, while I should not have to point out the following, I will note that Mary and I have been friendly acquaintances for longer than 95% or more of the people reading either FPN or FPB have even been in the hobby, so you will understand that I might have a touch of protectiveness for her. However, most of the issues raised by Hugh would seem to be valid points for discussion, and one of the charms of Fountain Pen Board (FPnuts), is that personal friendship does not buy special protection. The issues stand on their own merits.

Mary will choose to play if she finds issues worth discussing. If not, that choice will be respected of course.

regards

david

[Hugh]

So it would have to be a civil action on Jons part to recover his loss. Probably a couple $100 thousand in legal fees Jon will extract a new $10 keyboard out of you...

[david i]

Too bad the chat function isn't working, 7 people reading this topic, it's hotter than Delorean stock...

Never could get the damn thing to work. One day soon I will upgrade to latest version of boardware and have IPB check out the chat function.

regards

david

[JonSzanto]

I take it this aimed at me.

Both you and Andy, to be straight about it. I don't have a quarrel with your content at all, Hugh. I've seen these precise questions raised here before, and you guys have taken great pains to bring those of us not deep in the subject up to speed, for which I am grateful.

No, it was more about the manner. Having seen at least one reply from her, I have hopes Mary will not simply decide she doesn't feel a need to be pilloried. We all have our ways of expressing ourselves, but how one does that can have a direct effect on the response. I found the posts directed at her... a bit abrupt and roughly hewn. It may also be that I have read many of these threads, and remember that Ms. Burke has often been spoken of in a manner that is far less than charitable.

I may be alone in my viewpoint, but I see value in civility. Beyond that, one of the total bonuses of this board is being able to say what you wish. I've done that.

[Rick Krantz]

Already got a Commodore 64 keyboard in the mail, along with an apple IIe, just in case he's a Mac guy...

[david i]

10 watching... If I keep posting like this isaacson is going to freak out... Oh wait... I'm on his good boy list, I sent him a present this week.

Present, my hiney...

That was the most I've paid for any in this series. I just didn't want to give a fellow Advisor too much grief...

-d

[JonSzanto]

Fountain pen board assumes no responsibility for personal loss or injury that may occur by using this forum.

DAMN!!

[Rick Krantz]

Too bad the chat function isn't working, 7 people reading this topic, it's hotter than Delorean stock...

Never could get the damn thing to work. One day soon I will upgrade to latest version of boardware and have IPB check out the chat function.

regards

david

Yah! Happy Rick!

[JonSzanto]

In no order:

- You guys are killing me!
- I've had my say, just a venting of another opinion. I can't be too upset with Hugh, since he's the guy who steered me to my new (old) CS58.
- David, I honestly had no knowledge of your long history with MB, and your points are well-taken
- Tomorrow is the first day back at work at the *other* orchestra, so it is out to the studio to do some practice.

Be good to each other!

[Rick Krantz]

10 watching... If I keep posting like this isaacson is going to freak out... Oh wait... I'm on his good boy list, I sent him a present this week.

Present, my hiney...

That was the most I've paid for any in this series. I just didn't want to give a fellow Advisor too much grief...

-d

Oh

My

Goodness!

If you don't love it, bring it to DC! I only charge a 40% restocking fee.

It's guaranteed to please!

Once you get it, I'll send pictures to that kid that was floating around here, see if he can sell it to you...

[Rick Krantz]

In no order:

- You guys are killing me!
- I've had my say, just a venting of another opinion. I can't be too upset with Hugh, since he's the guy who steered me to my new (old) CS58.
- David, I honestly had no knowledge of your long history with MB, and your points are well-taken
- Tomorrow is the first day back at work at the *other* orchestra, so it is out to the studio to do some practice.

Be good to each other!

Well,

I wasn't feeling well today, so I took off work (paid sick days are okay)

I never got into the whole Mary/CS/FPN thing, it just did not interest me.

I don't go over to FPN anymore. Too many rule changes.

I secretly lust over the cracked ice 58's ( yeah, closet fetish, don't tell my chiltons)

I'm really looking forward to the DC pen show.

David is going to love his new addition when it arrives (hint: it's not a puppy, it's TWO puppies!)

[Shadow Wave]

I'm glad that both David I and Mary have pointed out the, er, fungible nature of Wikipedia articles. (Fungible may not be the exact word, but you get the idea.)

I take it that Andy has no interest in trying to update the CS article himself. Has anyone else considered it?

[Deb]

I don't want to give the impression that we are all piling onto Mary. I admire her courage in coming here to beard the lion in his den, as it were. Nonetheless, it would be a wasted opportunity not to raise the issues that lie behind some of the harsh things that have been said here and elsewhere.
I am astonished that the present-day Conway Stewart company has so little respect for history that it feels entitled to claim credit for the achievements of the defunct original Conway Stewart company. Referring to the present-day company's website, under "Heritage" I find,

"During the huge growth in letter writing during the First World War (1914 - 1918) our pens played a significant part...

and

"Our pens were also used throughout World War II..."

and

"Indeed, although our own factory was bombed..."

and

"We introduced such timeless classics as the Conway Stewart Dinkie..."

There are numerous other examples, each one an egregious distortion of history to allow the present-day company to bask in the unearned glory of the unrelated original company which was wound up in 1975. The only link between today's Conway Stewart company and the original one is the name and trade-marks which were purchased as commodities. The present day company did not introduce the Dinkie. It never owned the factory that was bombed. There is no continuity between the two entirely separate companies and the pretence that there is, is bad for the fountain pen hobby.

Falsifying the facts for marketing benefit is irresponsible and dishonest. When the Conway Stewart company declares on its website that this is the history, it's hardly surprising that the misguided believe it. In recent times in particular, comments in FPN suggest that this historical falsehood is beginning to be accepted as a true recounting of history.

The present-day Conway Stewart company is perfectly entitled to express its admiration for the achievements of its namesake and to use the historical pens as inspiration. It is not entitled to muddy the waters of historical veracity in its own commercial interest, and it is shameful that it has done so.

[david i]

SNIP

I am astonished that the present-day Conway Stewart company has so little respect for history that it feels entitled to claim credit for the achievements of the defunct original Conway Stewart company. Referring to the present-day company's website, under "Heritage" I find,
SNIP

A challenging issue, no doubt. But there certainly is corporate precedent for this sort. Buying trademarks and intellectual property? How 'bout buying company lock stock and barrel. Sheaffer and Parker appear to have no ties to original company, no longer using USA based factories (both companies were centered here for about a century), both owned entirely now by outside players, as with Parker by Newell Rubbermaid, though perhaps with a factory tie (based still in Newhaven, England) and as with Sheaffer by BIC. Parker and Sheaffer still trumpet their... heritage.

The Montgomery Ward (way back when a Sears scale company) website does not specify that Wards closed entirely around 2000 after about a century in business, with the... trademarks and other intellectual property... purchased around 2004 by an independent group.

In this post I don't take a firm stand on right or wrong of it, and don't even compare the various scenarios just name to CS's situation. Others are welcome to do so. I do suggest it is not uncommon in corporate speak for those who buy a company or who buy rights to company name to endeavor to embrace the... heritage... of said company.

Lack of accuracy regarding history would worry me more, in any case. And there does seem to be an element of that. On other hand, if one reads on the big American brands, it seems that anywhere from 10-50 years after a given pen was made, the companies- when referencing said pens in retrospect- managed to mangle details. Manufacturers, it seems, are less concerned with their own history than are collectors. Go figure...

regards

david

[AndyR]

So I grab a few hours sleep and all this happens! So many points to reply to and a topic to bring back on track, it seems......

Regarding Wikipedia, as raised by Mary, David & Shadow Wave. In my view Wikipedia is fundamentally flawed, being a site that essentially allows history to be written by public acclaim. I will not support it by reading it or writing for it for this reason. Anybody who treats it as the definitive source on anything is a fool. My main concern was the incorrect history published in the 2012 CS brochure but Jon pointed out the WIkipedia page in my earlier topic 'Re-writing history' and asked if it was accurate. He noted that it is the first point of call for many and if there was no better version available anywhere on the web, they should not be blamed for believing it. This is what caused me to start the present topic, posting the history as I did, it was never my intention to berate Mary for the Wikipedia entry as well. I repeat I am happy to change my account of the history if it can be proved wrong on any point (golden age discussions notwithstanding)!

Then I found the reply where Jon directly accused Hugh and I of being less than welcoming to Mary. I won't speak for Hugh (though obviously neither he nor I feel that bushes are for beating around), he is more than capable of standing up for himself, but I see no reason why he shouldn't ask those questions given the way he (and others) have been treated by FPN. On first reading Jon's assertion, I was slightly worried about what I had written given that it was late at night here but, having re-read it this morning, I wouldn't change a word of it. I simply care a great deal for the history of a fine old company that has been hijacked and muddied by a modern company. I do not accept Jon's view and I could name plenty of others on this board that should take lessons in courtesy from him before I do. I also note that Jon is no shrinking violet in stating his point of view either, and good on him for that, I wouldn't have it any other way but we will have to agree to disagree on the warmness of my welcome. It should be remembered that Mary's first post here wasn't in the 'Greetings' forum, where she may have had an easier ride, she chose to jump directly into this topic with both feet, exactly as I would have done. I am sure she was well aware of the more robust nature of discussions here, so nothing that has been posted so far would be surprising to her. What's more, by saying in her reply to me that Steve Hull will be asked to review the version of history in the next brochure, it seems she at least tacitly admits there were problems with what was written in the last brochure and it will be corrected. That is great, that is all I had ever wanted to happen. I wish she had taken the opportunity to join in to say this last year when I first invited her to post her views here but it is really good she has done this now and I genuinely hope she sticks around. I hope that Mary's smiley and the invitation to drop in to see her at the London Pen Show (in her last reply to me) means that the air is now rather clearer between us and I will be pleased to buy her a coffee there and talk further if she would still like to do so when the time comes round.

I do however still have issues with the way the modern CS company likes to claim the past as its own, exactly as Deb points out above, though this probably pre-dates Mary's involvement with the company. It is this claim that most infuriates the vintage collectors. Hell, since the pre-pack, it is not even the same company as the first modern CS company, though it is certainly a closer relation to that than the company founded in 1905. The logo that says 'Conway Stewart, Since 1905' says it all. Perhaps 'Conway Stewart, Since 1997' would be less appealing, though slightly more accurate. As I have said elsewhere, compare and contrast the attitudes of the modern Onoto company who sit very easily acknowledging their past while still drawing on it to make some marvellous pens with a modernised plunge filling system. They seem to have managed to do this successfully without alienating the vintage Onoto collectors.

Andy

[david i]

I do enjoy that FPB can have meaty chats that are not allowed to appear on FPN. That is, after all, a core reason for the founding of this board. If you want fluff, you know where to find it. If you want substance...

regards

david

[JonSzanto]

Andy is right on that: given the proper circumstances, my violet doesn't shrink.

Also - Andy, I think you've understood me properly, but just in case: WRT Wikipedia, I'm not actively promoting or supporting it as a platform, merely having noted that it has attained a somewhat prominent place in quick research, whether we like it or not. It is simply one of those things that one ignores at their own peril.

Edited by JonSzanto, 26 June 2013 - 03:02 PM.

[JonSzanto]

As part of the true history, and in thanks to Hugh (who gave me some guidance in my search), here is my recent purchase. The box, while a bit worse for the years, is charming in having an inscription on the bottom: "From David, Dec. 1952". Also, the little scrap of paper that I almost threw out is a torn bit from either an advert or catalog, with the (then) current prices of a few pens, including this #58.