Megalextoria
Retro computing and gaming, sci-fi books, tv and movies and other geeky stuff.

Home » Digital Archaeology » Computer Arcana » Computer Folklore » 1947--more on ink
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
1947--more on ink [message #353150] Fri, 22 September 2017 16:32 Go to next message
hancock4 is currently offline  hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Here's another ad just on ink for writing pens, by Parker, of 1947.

Note is has "super permanence, eleven times more resistant to fading".

https://books.google.com/books?id=LkIEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA3&a mp;dq=life%20sep%201%2C%201947&pg=PA4#v=onepage&q&am p;f=false

To justify an expensive full page ad like this in a national magazine,
it is obvious that back then people took their handwriting and
documents and letters very seriously.


For comparison, below is a link to today's Parker website for ink.
Note that today's ink was introduced in 1931, so apparently, it
is not as good as the "super" ink listed above.

http://www.parkerpen.com/en-US/shop-online/quink-bottle-refi ll-ink-for-fountain-pen-in-black-1950375--1
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353152 is a reply to message #353150] Fri, 22 September 2017 17:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Whiskers

On 2017-09-22, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> Here's another ad just on ink for writing pens, by Parker, of 1947.
>
> Note is has "super permanence, eleven times more resistant to fading".
>
> https://books.google.com/books?id=LkIEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA3&a mp;dq=life%20sep%201%2C%201947&pg=PA4#v=onepage&q&am p;f=false
>
> To justify an expensive full page ad like this in a national magazine,
> it is obvious that back then people took their handwriting and
> documents and letters very seriously.
>
>
> For comparison, below is a link to today's Parker website for ink.
> Note that today's ink was introduced in 1931, so apparently, it
> is not as good as the "super" ink listed above.
>
> http://www.parkerpen.com/en-US/shop-online/quink-bottle-refi ll-ink-for-fountain-pen-in-black-1950375--1

Even the Parker website looks faded. Almost to illegibility.

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353164 is a reply to message #353150] Fri, 22 September 2017 21:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: J. Clarke

On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 13:32:58 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> Here's another ad just on ink for writing pens, by Parker, of 1947.
>
> Note is has "super permanence, eleven times more resistant to fading".
>
> https://books.google.com/books?id=LkIEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA3&a mp;dq=life%20sep%201%2C%201947&pg=PA4#v=onepage&q&am p;f=false
>
> To justify an expensive full page ad like this in a national magazine,
> it is obvious that back then people took their handwriting and
> documents and letters very seriously.
>
>
> For comparison, below is a link to today's Parker website for ink.
> Note that today's ink was introduced in 1931, so apparently, it
> is not as good as the "super" ink listed above.
>
> http://www.parkerpen.com/en-US/shop-online/quink-bottle-refi ll-ink-for-fountain-pen-in-black-1950375--1

There is an issue with the Superchrome ink. It is corrosive. It has a
record of destroying Parker 51 pens. This was a Very Bad Thing for
Parker because the pens had a lifetime warranty until the government
forbade them from issuing lifetime warranties for some reason.
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353181 is a reply to message #353164] Fri, 22 September 2017 23:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hancock4 is currently offline  hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Friday, September 22, 2017 at 9:12:48 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 13:32:58 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> Here's another ad just on ink for writing pens, by Parker, of 1947.
>>
>> Note is has "super permanence, eleven times more resistant to fading".
>>
>> https://books.google.com/books?id=LkIEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA3&a mp;dq=life%20sep%201%2C%201947&pg=PA4#v=onepage&q&am p;f=false
>>
>> To justify an expensive full page ad like this in a national magazine,
>> it is obvious that back then people took their handwriting and
>> documents and letters very seriously.
>>
>>
>> For comparison, below is a link to today's Parker website for ink.
>> Note that today's ink was introduced in 1931, so apparently, it
>> is not as good as the "super" ink listed above.
>>
>> http://www.parkerpen.com/en-US/shop-online/quink-bottle-refi ll-ink-for-fountain-pen-in-black-1950375--1
>
> There is an issue with the Superchrome ink. It is corrosive. It has a
> record of destroying Parker 51 pens. This was a Very Bad Thing for
> Parker because the pens had a lifetime warranty until the government
> forbade them from issuing lifetime warranties for some reason.

I googled this, and while there were problems, it depended on the ink
and the pen. Some inks had alcohol which wasn't good with celluloid.
Some inks were very alkaline and destructive. But it appears Parker
was the premium company and very careful about its products.

Apparently the "Quink" ink was safe, but that was water based and not
as permanent, especially if it got wet.

I do know from my own testing and experience that there are definitely
distinct quality differences in inks and ink products (like pens,
typewriter ribbons, computer ribbons, bubblejet ink, toner, etc.)
Consumer Reports needs to do one of their scientific tests on commonly
used products of today to determine economy, ease of use, resistance to
fading, resistance to water, etc. (My own informal test showed Cross ink
to be the most permanent. I'd recommend the Cross rollerball, but
refills are expensive and needed often.)


Note that in the old days, there were several fountain pen makers and
a wide range of prices. You also had a choice of points depending on
your writing style.

I never had any trouble with a pen failing from the ink. My expensive
Waterman snapped in half, which irked me.

More of a problem was basic loss of a pen. I solved that by buying basic
BIC or Papermate stick pens by the package, which write well yet are very
cheap. If I lose one, I don't care.

But the biggest problem to fountain pens was that it was rather easy
to splatter ink on your document, your hands, or your clothes. If you
were using permanent ink, it was permanent on your clothes. One reason
ball point pens were invented was because foutain pens would leak
on airplanes.

Lastly, years ago I found the writing iwth the fountain pen great for
documents that had to be photocpied or faxed. I had two pens, one for
writing personal notes, and loaded with blue ink. The other I used
to write checks or other official documents, and loaded with black ink.

As an aside, I don't think my bank gives a damn about the kind of pen or
ink I use on a deposit slip or a check as long as they can read it. But
I understand 60 years ago they were quite fussy about that sort of thing.

As an aside, hanging in my school was some sort of founders document
with signatures from 25 years earlier. Most signatures were faded,
but one person's was crisp and clear. I wish I knew what particular ink
he used for that.
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353189 is a reply to message #353181] Sat, 23 September 2017 00:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: J. Clarke

On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 20:47:51 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> On Friday, September 22, 2017 at 9:12:48 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 13:32:58 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>> Here's another ad just on ink for writing pens, by Parker, of 1947.
>>>
>>> Note is has "super permanence, eleven times more resistant to fading".
>>>
>>> https://books.google.com/books?id=LkIEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA3&a mp;dq=life%20sep%201%2C%201947&pg=PA4#v=onepage&q&am p;f=false
>>>
>>> To justify an expensive full page ad like this in a national magazine,
>>> it is obvious that back then people took their handwriting and
>>> documents and letters very seriously.
>>>
>>>
>>> For comparison, below is a link to today's Parker website for ink.
>>> Note that today's ink was introduced in 1931, so apparently, it
>>> is not as good as the "super" ink listed above.
>>>
>>> http://www.parkerpen.com/en-US/shop-online/quink-bottle-refi ll-ink-for-fountain-pen-in-black-1950375--1
>>
>> There is an issue with the Superchrome ink. It is corrosive. It has a
>> record of destroying Parker 51 pens. This was a Very Bad Thing for
>> Parker because the pens had a lifetime warranty until the government
>> forbade them from issuing lifetime warranties for some reason.
>
> I googled this, and while there were problems, it depended on the ink
> and the pen. Some inks had alcohol which wasn't good with celluloid.
> Some inks were very alkaline and destructive. But it appears Parker
> was the premium company and very careful about its products.

Google more. I am speaking specifically of Parker Superchrome Ink and
the Parker 51 series of pens, which are specifically mentioned in the
advertisement for Superchrome ink and is specifically mentioned on the
sites of collectors specializing in the Parker 51 as being an issue
with that pen.

That "some inks this" and "some inks that" and "some inks the other"
is not relevant. I am not talking about "some inks", I am talking
about the Superchrome brand of ink made by Parker.

The same for "some pens". I am not talking about "some pens". I am
talking about the model 51 pen made by Parker.

> Apparently the "Quink" ink was safe, but that was water based and not
> as permanent, especially if it got wet.
>
> I do know from my own testing and experience that there are definitely
> distinct quality differences in inks and ink products (like pens,
> typewriter ribbons, computer ribbons, bubblejet ink, toner, etc.)
> Consumer Reports needs to do one of their scientific tests on commonly
> used products of today to determine economy, ease of use, resistance to
> fading, resistance to water, etc. (My own informal test showed Cross ink
> to be the most permanent. I'd recommend the Cross rollerball, but
> refills are expensive and needed often.)

Fountain pens are a hobbyist and collector product today. Gel pens
are the practical writing instrument.


>
>
> Note that in the old days, there were several fountain pen makers and
> a wide range of prices. You also had a choice of points depending on
> your writing style.
>
> I never had any trouble with a pen failing from the ink. My expensive
> Waterman snapped in half, which irked me.
>
> More of a problem was basic loss of a pen. I solved that by buying basic
> BIC or Papermate stick pens by the package, which write well yet are very
> cheap. If I lose one, I don't care.
>
> But the biggest problem to fountain pens was that it was rather easy
> to splatter ink on your document, your hands, or your clothes. If you
> were using permanent ink, it was permanent on your clothes. One reason
> ball point pens were invented was because foutain pens would leak
> on airplanes.
>
> Lastly, years ago I found the writing iwth the fountain pen great for
> documents that had to be photocpied or faxed. I had two pens, one for
> writing personal notes, and loaded with blue ink. The other I used
> to write checks or other official documents, and loaded with black ink.
>
> As an aside, I don't think my bank gives a damn about the kind of pen or
> ink I use on a deposit slip or a check as long as they can read it. But
> I understand 60 years ago they were quite fussy about that sort of thing.
>
> As an aside, hanging in my school was some sort of founders document
> with signatures from 25 years earlier. Most signatures were faded,
> but one person's was crisp and clear. I wish I knew what particular ink
> he used for that.
>
>
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353201 is a reply to message #353181] Sat, 23 September 2017 10:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Friday, September 22, 2017 at 9:12:48 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 13:32:58 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>> Here's another ad just on ink for writing pens, by Parker, of 1947.
>>>
>>> Note is has "super permanence, eleven times more resistant to fading".
>>>
>>> https://books.google.com/books?id=LkIEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA3&a mp;dq=life%20sep%201%2
C%201947&pg=PA4#v=onepage&q&f=false
>>>
>>> To justify an expensive full page ad like this in a national magazine,
>>> it is obvious that back then people took their handwriting and
>>> documents and letters very seriously.
>>>
>>>
>>> For comparison, below is a link to today's Parker website for ink.
>>> Note that today's ink was introduced in 1931, so apparently, it
>>> is not as good as the "super" ink listed above.
>>>
>>> http://www.parkerpen.com/en-US/shop-online/quink-bottle-refi ll-ink-for-fou
ntain-pen-in-black-1950375--1
>>
>> There is an issue with the Superchrome ink. It is corrosive. It has a
>> record of destroying Parker 51 pens. This was a Very Bad Thing for
>> Parker because the pens had a lifetime warranty until the government
>> forbade them from issuing lifetime warranties for some reason.
>
> I googled this, and while there were problems, it depended on the ink
> and the pen. Some inks had alcohol which wasn't good with celluloid.
> Some inks were very alkaline and destructive. But it appears Parker
> was the premium company and very careful about its products.
>
> Apparently the "Quink" ink was safe, but that was water based and not
> as permanent, especially if it got wet.
>
> I do know from my own testing and experience that there are definitely
> distinct quality differences in inks and ink products (like pens,
> typewriter ribbons, computer ribbons, bubblejet ink, toner, etc.)
> Consumer Reports needs to do one of their scientific tests on commonly
> used products of today to determine economy, ease of use, resistance to
> fading, resistance to water, etc. (My own informal test showed Cross ink
> to be the most permanent. I'd recommend the Cross rollerball, but
> refills are expensive and needed often.)
>
>
> Note that in the old days, there were several fountain pen makers and
> a wide range of prices. You also had a choice of points depending on
> your writing style.
>
> I never had any trouble with a pen failing from the ink. My expensive
> Waterman snapped in half, which irked me.
>
> More of a problem was basic loss of a pen. I solved that by buying basic
> BIC or Papermate stick pens by the package, which write well yet are very
> cheap. If I lose one, I don't care.
>
> But the biggest problem to fountain pens was that it was rather easy
> to splatter ink on your document, your hands, or your clothes. If you
> were using permanent ink, it was permanent on your clothes. One reason
> ball point pens were invented was because foutain pens would leak
> on airplanes.
>
> Lastly, years ago I found the writing iwth the fountain pen great for
> documents that had to be photocpied or faxed. I had two pens, one for
> writing personal notes, and loaded with blue ink. The other I used
> to write checks or other official documents, and loaded with black ink.
>
> As an aside, I don't think my bank gives a damn about the kind of pen or
> ink I use on a deposit slip or a check as long as they can read it. But
> I understand 60 years ago they were quite fussy about that sort of thing.
>
> As an aside, hanging in my school was some sort of founders document
> with signatures from 25 years earlier. Most signatures were faded,
> but one person's was crisp and clear. I wish I knew what particular ink
> he used for that.

India ink? JMF's throat cancer doctors marked the inside of his
throat with india ink; they told me it was permanent and they
needed the markers for measurements and analysis of the efficacy of
treatment.

/BAH
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353230 is a reply to message #353164] Sat, 23 September 2017 17:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 13:32:58 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> Here's another ad just on ink for writing pens, by Parker, of 1947.
>>
>> Note is has "super permanence, eleven times more resistant to fading".
>>
>> https://books.google.com/books?id=LkIEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA3&a mp;dq=life%20sep%201%2C%201947&pg=PA4#v=onepage&q&am p;f=false
>>
>> To justify an expensive full page ad like this in a national magazine,
>> it is obvious that back then people took their handwriting and
>> documents and letters very seriously.
>>
>>
>> For comparison, below is a link to today's Parker website for ink.
>> Note that today's ink was introduced in 1931, so apparently, it
>> is not as good as the "super" ink listed above.
>>
>> http://www.parkerpen.com/en-US/shop-online/quink-bottle-refi ll-ink-for-fountain-pen-in-black-1950375--1
>
> There is an issue with the Superchrome ink. It is corrosive. It has a
> record of destroying Parker 51 pens. This was a Very Bad Thing for
> Parker because the pens had a lifetime warranty until the government
> forbade them from issuing lifetime warranties for some reason.
>
>

Your pen died, therefore the lifetime warranty expired ;-) Does Craftsman
still have a lifetime warranty on tools? I guess Sears sold off the brand.

--
Pete
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353236 is a reply to message #353230] Sat, 23 September 2017 19:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: J. Clarke

On Sat, 23 Sep 2017 17:29:09 -0400, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:

> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 13:32:58 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>> Here's another ad just on ink for writing pens, by Parker, of 1947.
>>>
>>> Note is has "super permanence, eleven times more resistant to fading".
>>>
>>> https://books.google.com/books?id=LkIEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA3&a mp;dq=life%20sep%201%2C%201947&pg=PA4#v=onepage&q&am p;f=false
>>>
>>> To justify an expensive full page ad like this in a national magazine,
>>> it is obvious that back then people took their handwriting and
>>> documents and letters very seriously.
>>>
>>>
>>> For comparison, below is a link to today's Parker website for ink.
>>> Note that today's ink was introduced in 1931, so apparently, it
>>> is not as good as the "super" ink listed above.
>>>
>>> http://www.parkerpen.com/en-US/shop-online/quink-bottle-refi ll-ink-for-fountain-pen-in-black-1950375--1
>>
>> There is an issue with the Superchrome ink. It is corrosive. It has a
>> record of destroying Parker 51 pens. This was a Very Bad Thing for
>> Parker because the pens had a lifetime warranty until the government
>> forbade them from issuing lifetime warranties for some reason.
>>
>>
>
> Your pen died, therefore the lifetime warranty expired ;-)

That is not the way Parker handled it. People with 50 year old pens
have gotten them fixed under the Parker lifetime warranty.

> Does Craftsman
> still have a lifetime warranty on tools?

"If this Craftsman (or Craftsman Industrial) hand tool ever fails to
provide complete satisfaction, it will be repaired or replaced free of
charge."

> I guess Sears sold off the brand.

To Stanley.
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353258 is a reply to message #353236] Sun, 24 September 2017 06:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Sep 2017 17:29:09 -0400, Peter Flass
> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 13:32:58 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> Here's another ad just on ink for writing pens, by Parker, of 1947.
>>>>
>>>> Note is has "super permanence, eleven times more resistant to fading".
>>>>
>>>> https://books.google.com/books?id=LkIEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA3&a mp;dq=life%20sep%201%2C%201947&pg=PA4#v=onepage&q&am p;f=false
>>>>
>>>> To justify an expensive full page ad like this in a national magazine,
>>>> it is obvious that back then people took their handwriting and
>>>> documents and letters very seriously.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For comparison, below is a link to today's Parker website for ink.
>>>> Note that today's ink was introduced in 1931, so apparently, it
>>>> is not as good as the "super" ink listed above.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.parkerpen.com/en-US/shop-online/quink-bottle-refi ll-ink-for-fountain-pen-in-black-1950375--1
>>>
>>> There is an issue with the Superchrome ink. It is corrosive. It has a
>>> record of destroying Parker 51 pens. This was a Very Bad Thing for
>>> Parker because the pens had a lifetime warranty until the government
>>> forbade them from issuing lifetime warranties for some reason.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Your pen died, therefore the lifetime warranty expired ;-)
>
> That is not the way Parker handled it. People with 50 year old pens
> have gotten them fixed under the Parker lifetime warranty.
>
>> Does Craftsman
>> still have a lifetime warranty on tools?
>
> "If this Craftsman (or Craftsman Industrial) hand tool ever fails to
> provide complete satisfaction, it will be repaired or replaced free of
> charge."
>
>> I guess Sears sold off the brand.
>
> To Stanley.
>

Stanley used to make good stuff, too, but now I think all _their_ tools
are made in China.

--
Pete
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353267 is a reply to message #353258] Sun, 24 September 2017 08:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: J. Clarke

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 06:29:47 -0400, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:

> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 23 Sep 2017 17:29:09 -0400, Peter Flass
>> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 13:32:58 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Here's another ad just on ink for writing pens, by Parker, of 1947.
>>>> >
>>>> > Note is has "super permanence, eleven times more resistant to fading".
>>>> >
>>>> > https://books.google.com/books?id=LkIEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA3&a mp;dq=life%20sep%201%2C%201947&pg=PA4#v=onepage&q&am p;f=false
>>>> >
>>>> > To justify an expensive full page ad like this in a national magazine,
>>>> > it is obvious that back then people took their handwriting and
>>>> > documents and letters very seriously.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > For comparison, below is a link to today's Parker website for ink.
>>>> > Note that today's ink was introduced in 1931, so apparently, it
>>>> > is not as good as the "super" ink listed above.
>>>> >
>>>> > http://www.parkerpen.com/en-US/shop-online/quink-bottle-refi ll-ink-for-fountain-pen-in-black-1950375--1
>>>>
>>>> There is an issue with the Superchrome ink. It is corrosive. It has a
>>>> record of destroying Parker 51 pens. This was a Very Bad Thing for
>>>> Parker because the pens had a lifetime warranty until the government
>>>> forbade them from issuing lifetime warranties for some reason.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Your pen died, therefore the lifetime warranty expired ;-)
>>
>> That is not the way Parker handled it. People with 50 year old pens
>> have gotten them fixed under the Parker lifetime warranty.
>>
>>> Does Craftsman
>>> still have a lifetime warranty on tools?
>>
>> "If this Craftsman (or Craftsman Industrial) hand tool ever fails to
>> provide complete satisfaction, it will be repaired or replaced free of
>> charge."
>>
>>> I guess Sears sold off the brand.
>>
>> To Stanley.
>>
>
> Stanley used to make good stuff, too, but now I think all _their_ tools
> are made in China.

Which doesn't preclude being good stuff. In any case Stanley
advertises "Made in USA of global materials"--note "materials", not
"parts".
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353377 is a reply to message #353152] Mon, 25 September 2017 10:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Quadibloc is currently offline  Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Friday, September 22, 2017 at 3:24:42 PM UTC-6, Whiskers wrote:

> Even the Parker website looks faded. Almost to illegibility.

Reading the faded text, I see:

"Introduced in 1931, PARKER QUINK inks are produced respecting high quality
standard. QUINK is a quick-drying ink specially formulated for an optimum writing performance."

This text is unidiomatic and gramatically flawed. The pattern of its errors
implies it was written by someone for whom Chinese, rather than English, was his
first language.

Thus, the Parker Pen company has indeed fallen on hard times.

John Savard
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353378 is a reply to message #353164] Mon, 25 September 2017 11:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Quadibloc is currently offline  Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Friday, September 22, 2017 at 7:12:48 PM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:

> There is an issue with the Superchrome ink. It is corrosive. It has a
> record of destroying Parker 51 pens.

I've Googled this too.

Even Quink contains isopropyl alcohol as a solvent - so it had a problem with
other Parker pens, but the Parker 51 was designed to tolerate it.

Superchrome has a pH level of 12. It is indeed corrosive - but it's *alkaline*.
Which means that it should be safe with the _metal_ parts of a pen, for the same
reason that one can use some pretty strong alkaline substances to unclog the
metal drain pipes in your plumbing.

The trouble is, of course, that a pen isn't only made of metal parts, and the
ink came in contact with some that weren't metal. But I can see why they
expected it to work in a reasonable manner.

John Savard
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353397 is a reply to message #353377] Mon, 25 September 2017 14:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Whiskers

On 2017-09-25, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Friday, September 22, 2017 at 3:24:42 PM UTC-6, Whiskers wrote:
>
>> Even the Parker website looks faded. Almost to illegibility.
>
> Reading the faded text, I see:
>
> "Introduced in 1931, PARKER QUINK inks are produced respecting high
> quality standard. QUINK is a quick-drying ink specially formulated for
> an optimum writing performance."
>
> This text is unidiomatic and gramatically flawed. The pattern of its
> errors implies it was written by someone for whom Chinese, rather than
> English, was his first language.
>
> Thus, the Parker Pen company has indeed fallen on hard times.
>
> John Savard

I have an expensive Parker ball-point pen over 30 years old, with
Chinese characters 'invisibly' etched into the polished lacquer. A
colleague who could read Mandarin told me they have no meaning as such,
but if pronounced would sound like 'paa ker'.

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353399 is a reply to message #353377] Mon, 25 September 2017 14:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Quadibloc is currently offline  Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 8:57:59 AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Friday, September 22, 2017 at 3:24:42 PM UTC-6, Whiskers wrote:
>
>> Even the Parker website looks faded. Almost to illegibility.
>
> Reading the faded text, I see:
>
> "Introduced in 1931, PARKER QUINK inks are produced respecting high quality
> standard. QUINK is a quick-drying ink specially formulated for an optimum writing performance."
>
> This text is unidiomatic and gramatically flawed. The pattern of its errors
> implies it was written by someone for whom Chinese, rather than English, was his
> first language.
>
> Thus, the Parker Pen company has indeed fallen on hard times.

However, Wikipedia only has them having been bought out by a French company in
2011 - and apparently before that by a British company.

John Savard
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353402 is a reply to message #353399] Mon, 25 September 2017 14:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hancock4 is currently offline  hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 2:30:54 PM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:

> However, Wikipedia only has them having been bought out by a French company in
> 2011 - and apparently before that by a British company.

To give equal time, here is a link to a Sheaffer's pen and ink ad.
While the headline refers to economy, the text gives many claims to
its quality. An ink bottle, at 15 cents, claims to "make better business
records".

https://books.google.com/books?id=wEUEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PP2&a mp;dq=life%20skrip%20ink&pg=PP2#v=onepage&q&f=fa lse

Note, the price of an ink bottle went up nearly 100 times (15c to $12)!


For a long time, Sheaffer's made inexpensive fountain pens available
at discount stores. They used cartridges only. The better pens could
use either a cartridge or well (called a "converter".)


* Woolworth's always had them, but they're gone.
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353403 is a reply to message #353397] Mon, 25 September 2017 14:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ahem A Rivet's Shot is currently offline  Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:27:29 +0100
Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote:

> I have an expensive Parker ball-point pen over 30 years old, with
> Chinese characters 'invisibly' etched into the polished lacquer. A
> colleague who could read Mandarin told me they have no meaning as such,
> but if pronounced would sound like 'paa ker'.

So like the Foo King Chinese Restaurant.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353411 is a reply to message #353399] Mon, 25 September 2017 19:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hancock4 is currently offline  hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 2:30:54 PM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:

>> Thus, the Parker Pen company has indeed fallen on hard times.
>
> However, Wikipedia only has them having been bought out by a French company in
> 2011 - and apparently before that by a British company.


Here's a two page ad by Esterbrook showing the multiple points and
writing styles:
https://books.google.com/books?id=6UcEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PP1&a mp;dq=life%20aug%2027%201956&pg=PA16#v=onepage&q=ink &f=false

Here's a small ad by Sheaffer for Skript "RC-35" that features
protection against alteration, clogging, and corrosion.

Funny, do we see computers ad today that feature protection
against alteration?
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353424 is a reply to message #353150] Mon, 25 September 2017 22:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Gene Wirchenko is currently offline  Gene Wirchenko
Messages: 1166
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 11:10:06 -0500, Dave Garland
<dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:

> On 9/23/2017 4:29 PM, Peter Flass wrote:
>
>> Your pen died, therefore the lifetime warranty expired ;-) Does Craftsman
>> still have a lifetime warranty on tools? I guess Sears sold off the brand.
>>
>
> I believe they do (Stanley/B&D/etc. owns them now). But "lifetime
> warranty" isn't unusual with tools that are midrange or better, a lot
> of companies have this on hand tools. E.g. Ridgid, Husky, Irwin,
> Snap-On, Duralast (Auto Zone), some tool lines from Stanley, Proto,
> and even Harbor Freight(!) (for those readers outside the US, Harbor
> Freight is a chain that sells mostly very cheap Chinese tools). It's a
> marketing tool. The attraction with Craftsman was that there were a
> lot of Sears locations so getting warranty service was easy (that
> policy doesn't appear to have changed, though it's not clear if you
> now have to prove you bought it at the retailer where you're trying to
> get it replaced).

It is changing in Canada. Sears Canada has filed for bankrupcy.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353431 is a reply to message #353402] Tue, 26 September 2017 00:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Charles Richmond is currently offline  Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 9/25/2017 1:53 PM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 2:30:54 PM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
>
>> However, Wikipedia only has them having been bought out by a French company in
>> 2011 - and apparently before that by a British company.
>
> To give equal time, here is a link to a Sheaffer's pen and ink ad.
> While the headline refers to economy, the text gives many claims to
> its quality. An ink bottle, at 15 cents, claims to "make better business
> records".
>
> https://books.google.com/books?id=wEUEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PP2&a mp;dq=life%20skrip%20ink&pg=PP2#v=onepage&q&f=fa lse
>
> Note, the price of an ink bottle went up nearly 100 times (15c to $12)!
>
>
> For a long time, Sheaffer's made inexpensive fountain pens available
> at discount stores. They used cartridges only. The better pens could
> use either a cartridge or well (called a "converter".)
>

ISTM that one can do things the *old* way... one must pay several times
as much for the old way than doing things the newer way.

So fountain pen ink (3 oz bottle, *not* 4 oz like before) now cost about
$12 US. Some older folk who have the traditional "land line" phones
can pay $70 US per month. You can even drive an old Ford Model A (from
circa 1928), but the machine tooled parts get awfully expensive.


--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353444 is a reply to message #353403] Tue, 26 September 2017 05:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Kerr-Mudd,John

Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in
news:20170925195353.2c6e531fe26a69829f7f7ec1@eircom.net:

> On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:27:29 +0100
> Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote:
>
>> I have an expensive Parker ball-point pen over 30 years old, with
>> Chinese characters 'invisibly' etched into the polished lacquer. A
>> colleague who could read Mandarin told me they have no meaning as
such,
>> but if pronounced would sound like 'paa ker'.
>
> So like the Foo King Chinese Restaurant.
>

Ho Lee Fuk!

(
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhSc8qVMjKM
)

but I expect you knew that.
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353448 is a reply to message #353399] Tue, 26 September 2017 07:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Whiskers

On 2017-09-25, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 8:57:59 AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
>> On Friday, September 22, 2017 at 3:24:42 PM UTC-6, Whiskers wrote:
>>
>>> Even the Parker website looks faded. Almost to illegibility.
>>
>> Reading the faded text, I see:
>>
>> "Introduced in 1931, PARKER QUINK inks are produced respecting high
>> quality standard. QUINK is a quick-drying ink specially formulated
>> for an optimum writing performance."
>>
>> This text is unidiomatic and gramatically flawed. The pattern of its
>> errors implies it was written by someone for whom Chinese, rather
>> than English, was his first language.
>>
>> Thus, the Parker Pen company has indeed fallen on hard times.
>
> However, Wikipedia only has them having been bought out by a French
> company in 2011 - and apparently before that by a British company.
>
> John Savard

I think my Parker Sonnet fountain pen dates from about the turn of the
century, and appears to have been made in France.

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353455 is a reply to message #353444] Tue, 26 September 2017 08:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: JimP.

On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 09:47:07 -0000 (UTC), "Kerr-Mudd,John"
<notsaying@invalid.org> wrote:

> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in
> news:20170925195353.2c6e531fe26a69829f7f7ec1@eircom.net:
>
>> On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:27:29 +0100
>> Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I have an expensive Parker ball-point pen over 30 years old, with
>>> Chinese characters 'invisibly' etched into the polished lacquer. A
>>> colleague who could read Mandarin told me they have no meaning as
> such,
>>> but if pronounced would sound like 'paa ker'.
>>
>> So like the Foo King Chinese Restaurant.
>>
>
> Ho Lee Fuk!
>
> (
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhSc8qVMjKM
> )
>
> but I expect you knew that.

And his hair was... Perfect !

And its Lee Ho Fuk.
--
Jim
Re: old new stuff or new old stuff or 1947--more on ink [message #353491 is a reply to message #353431] Tue, 26 September 2017 20:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
John Levine is currently offline  John Levine
Messages: 1405
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <oqcjv7$s93$1@dont-email.me>,
Charles Richmond <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> ISTM that one can do things the *old* way... one must pay several times
> as much for the old way than doing things the newer way.
>
> So fountain pen ink (3 oz bottle, *not* 4 oz like before) now cost about
> $12 US.

I am lazy so I use Pilot Varsity disposable fountain pens for about $2
each. They have remarkably good nibs, don't leak, and don't need to
be refilled.

Some older folk who have the traditional "land line" phones
> can pay $70 US per month.

Really? I pay $44 including a rather high $6 for CO based voice mail.
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353526 is a reply to message #353431] Wed, 27 September 2017 04:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Andy Leighton is currently offline  Andy Leighton
Messages: 203
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 23:10:23 -0500, Charles Richmond <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>
> So fountain pen ink (3 oz bottle, *not* 4 oz like before) now cost about
> $12 US.

Having just looked I've seen ink come in all sizes from 10ml to 1 litre.
Popular sizes are 50ml, 60ml and 80ml. But your price is about right,
if not on the low side. However there is far more choice in quality ink
these days - both colour and brand. People are less likely to stick to
a large bottle of blue-black.

--
Andy Leighton => andyl@azaal.plus.com
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
- Douglas Adams
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353658 is a reply to message #353150] Sat, 30 September 2017 17:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Chris

On 09/22/17 20:32, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> Here's another ad just on ink for writing pens, by Parker, of 1947.
>
> Note is has "super permanence, eleven times more resistant to fading".
>
> https://books.google.com/books?id=LkIEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA3&a mp;dq=life%20sep%201%2C%201947&pg=PA4#v=onepage&q&am p;f=false
>
> To justify an expensive full page ad like this in a national magazine,
> it is obvious that back then people took their handwriting and
> documents and letters very seriously.
>
>
> For comparison, below is a link to today's Parker website for ink.
> Note that today's ink was introduced in 1931, so apparently, it
> is not as good as the "super" ink listed above.
>
> http://www.parkerpen.com/en-US/shop-online/quink-bottle-refi ll-ink-for-fountain-pen-in-black-1950375--1

Just checked that, but have you seen the prices of new fountain
pens now ?. 900 or 1000 usd, outrageous. Used Parker pens at school
in youth, but would never pay that sort of price for one. Must be
some sort of luxury goods fetish, much like many other formally
quality brands. Probably owned by and made in China these days...

Chris
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353665 is a reply to message #353658] Sat, 30 September 2017 20:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: J. Clarke

On Sat, 30 Sep 2017 21:58:23 +0000, Chris <xxx.syseng.yyy@gfsys.co.uk>
wrote:

> On 09/22/17 20:32, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> Here's another ad just on ink for writing pens, by Parker, of 1947.
>>
>> Note is has "super permanence, eleven times more resistant to fading".
>>
>> https://books.google.com/books?id=LkIEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA3&a mp;dq=life%20sep%201%2C%201947&pg=PA4#v=onepage&q&am p;f=false
>>
>> To justify an expensive full page ad like this in a national magazine,
>> it is obvious that back then people took their handwriting and
>> documents and letters very seriously.
>>
>>
>> For comparison, below is a link to today's Parker website for ink.
>> Note that today's ink was introduced in 1931, so apparently, it
>> is not as good as the "super" ink listed above.
>>
>> http://www.parkerpen.com/en-US/shop-online/quink-bottle-refi ll-ink-for-fountain-pen-in-black-1950375--1
>
> Just checked that, but have you seen the prices of new fountain
> pens now ?. 900 or 1000 usd, outrageous.

There have always been expensive luxury pens. However Amazon has in
stock new Lamys for around $30, Pilots for around $12 (the Varsities
which are not refillable for even less), Pelikans for 10-20,
Watermans starting around 30, and Parkers starting around 20, among
others.

> Used Parker pens at school
> in youth, but would never pay that sort of price for one. Must be
> some sort of luxury goods fetish, much like many other formally
> quality brands. Probably owned by and made in China these days...
>
> Chris
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353681 is a reply to message #353665] Sun, 01 October 2017 05:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Bob Eager

On Sat, 30 Sep 2017 20:35:32 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:

> There have always been expensive luxury pens. However Amazon has in
> stock new Lamys for around $30, Pilots for around $12 (the Varsities
> which are not refillable for even less), Pelikans for 10-20, Watermans
> starting around 30, and Parkers starting around 20, among others.

I personally use ballpoint pens that utilise good quality Parker refills.
However, mine is a bit out of the ordinary (I guess I should say "are",
as I have three (and a matching propelling pencil):

https://www.cultpens.com/i/q/CL19779/cleo-messograf-pen

https://www.cultpens.com/i/q/CL54321/cleo-messograf-mechanic al-pencil-07

--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353692 is a reply to message #353681] Sun, 01 October 2017 15:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Andy Leighton is currently offline  Andy Leighton
Messages: 203
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 1 Oct 2017 09:49:18 GMT, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Sep 2017 20:35:32 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> There have always been expensive luxury pens. However Amazon has in
>> stock new Lamys for around $30, Pilots for around $12 (the Varsities
>> which are not refillable for even less), Pelikans for 10-20, Watermans
>> starting around 30, and Parkers starting around 20, among others.
>
> I personally use ballpoint pens that utilise good quality Parker refills.
> However, mine is a bit out of the ordinary (I guess I should say "are",
> as I have three (and a matching propelling pencil):
>
> https://www.cultpens.com/i/q/CL19779/cleo-messograf-pen

I have one of those.

I also have one of these
https://www.cultpens.com/i/q/MV52159/monteverde-tool-pen-bal lpoint-brass

But most of my writing is done using a J. Herbin rollerball which takes
standard international ink cartridges. These are even more ever-present
than Parker G2 refills in shops and a spare cartridge is easy to carry
around.

--
Andy Leighton => andyl@azaal.plus.com
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
- Douglas Adams
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353693 is a reply to message #353692] Sun, 01 October 2017 15:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: J. Clarke

On Sun, 01 Oct 2017 14:07:23 -0500, Andy Leighton
<andyl@azaal.plus.com> wrote:

> On 1 Oct 2017 09:49:18 GMT, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2017 20:35:32 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>> There have always been expensive luxury pens. However Amazon has in
>>> stock new Lamys for around $30, Pilots for around $12 (the Varsities
>>> which are not refillable for even less), Pelikans for 10-20, Watermans
>>> starting around 30, and Parkers starting around 20, among others.
>>
>> I personally use ballpoint pens that utilise good quality Parker refills.
>> However, mine is a bit out of the ordinary (I guess I should say "are",
>> as I have three (and a matching propelling pencil):
>>
>> https://www.cultpens.com/i/q/CL19779/cleo-messograf-pen
>
> I have one of those.
>
> I also have one of these
> https://www.cultpens.com/i/q/MV52159/monteverde-tool-pen-bal lpoint-brass
>
> But most of my writing is done using a J. Herbin rollerball which takes
> standard international ink cartridges. These are even more ever-present
> than Parker G2 refills in shops and a spare cartridge is easy to carry
> around.

Have you tried it with Herbin bottled ink?
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353729 is a reply to message #353693] Mon, 02 October 2017 11:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Andy Leighton is currently offline  Andy Leighton
Messages: 203
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Sun, 01 Oct 2017 15:20:11 -0400, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Oct 2017 14:07:23 -0500, Andy Leighton
> <andyl@azaal.plus.com> wrote:
>
>> On 1 Oct 2017 09:49:18 GMT, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2017 20:35:32 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>
>>>> There have always been expensive luxury pens. However Amazon has in
>>>> stock new Lamys for around $30, Pilots for around $12 (the Varsities
>>>> which are not refillable for even less), Pelikans for 10-20, Watermans
>>>> starting around 30, and Parkers starting around 20, among others.
>>>
>>> I personally use ballpoint pens that utilise good quality Parker refills.
>>> However, mine is a bit out of the ordinary (I guess I should say "are",
>>> as I have three (and a matching propelling pencil):
>>>
>>> https://www.cultpens.com/i/q/CL19779/cleo-messograf-pen
>>
>> I have one of those.
>>
>> I also have one of these
>> https://www.cultpens.com/i/q/MV52159/monteverde-tool-pen-bal lpoint-brass
>>
>> But most of my writing is done using a J. Herbin rollerball which takes
>> standard international ink cartridges. These are even more ever-present
>> than Parker G2 refills in shops and a spare cartridge is easy to carry
>> around.
>
> Have you tried it with Herbin bottled ink?

I haven't. I would think only the mini-converters would fit. Having
done a quick google I see people do use mini-converters and they work
quite well so I will have to give it a go. Although I will probably
go with Diamine bottled ink.

--
Andy Leighton => andyl@azaal.plus.com
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
- Douglas Adams
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353733 is a reply to message #353729] Mon, 02 October 2017 12:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Gareth's Downstairs Computer

On 02/10/2017 16:39, Andy Leighton wrote:
>
> I haven't. I would think only the mini-converters would fit. Having
> done a quick google I see people do use mini-converters and they work
> quite well so I will have to give it a go. Although I will probably
> go with Diamine bottled ink.
>

Altogether now, from our rugby song days ...

They called the bastard Stephen,
They called the bastard Stephen,
They called the bastard Stephen,
Because that was the name of the ink.

Not Quink!
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353734 is a reply to message #353397] Mon, 02 October 2017 12:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Andreas Eder is currently offline  Andreas Eder
Messages: 128
Registered: October 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Mo 25 Sep 2017 at 19:27, Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote:

> I have an expensive Parker ball-point pen over 30 years old, with
> Chinese characters 'invisibly' etched into the polished lacquer. A
> colleague who could read Mandarin told me they have no meaning as such,
> but if pronounced would sound like 'paa ker'.

Interesting; I always thought that chinese ideograms do not have an
inherent pronunciation apart from their meaning.
At least, that's what I#ve told in my mandarin course.

'Andreas
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353735 is a reply to message #353734] Mon, 02 October 2017 13:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Whiskers

On 2017-10-02, Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> wrote:
> On Mo 25 Sep 2017 at 19:27, Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote:
>
>> I have an expensive Parker ball-point pen over 30 years old, with
>> Chinese characters 'invisibly' etched into the polished lacquer. A
>> colleague who could read Mandarin told me they have no meaning as such,
>> but if pronounced would sound like 'paa ker'.
>
> Interesting; I always thought that chinese ideograms do not have an
> inherent pronunciation apart from their meaning.
> At least, that's what I#ve told in my mandarin course.
>
> 'Andreas

Presumably there is some way of representing the pronunciation of
non-Mandarin words using Mandarin characters. How it works I don't
know, but my colleague seemed fairly confident. Of course the
characters might say 'Capitalist Running Dog' or 'Fred made this
lacquer' for all I know.

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353744 is a reply to message #353735] Mon, 02 October 2017 14:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Charlie Gibbs is currently offline  Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 2017-10-02, Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote:

> On 2017-10-02, Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> wrote:
>
>> On Mo 25 Sep 2017 at 19:27, Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I have an expensive Parker ball-point pen over 30 years old, with
>>> Chinese characters 'invisibly' etched into the polished lacquer. A
>>> colleague who could read Mandarin told me they have no meaning as such,
>>> but if pronounced would sound like 'paa ker'.
>>
>> Interesting; I always thought that chinese ideograms do not have an
>> inherent pronunciation apart from their meaning.
>> At least, that's what I#ve told in my mandarin course.
>
> Presumably there is some way of representing the pronunciation of
> non-Mandarin words using Mandarin characters. How it works I don't
> know, but my colleague seemed fairly confident. Of course the
> characters might say 'Capitalist Running Dog' or 'Fred made this
> lacquer' for all I know.

Does that mean that Fred is a running-dog lacquer of the bourgeoisie?

--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353745 is a reply to message #353735] Mon, 02 October 2017 15:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mike Spencer is currently offline  Mike Spencer
Messages: 997
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> writes:

> Presumably there is some way of representing the pronunciation of
> non-Mandarin words using Mandarin characters. How it works I don't
> know, but my colleague seemed fairly confident. Of course the
> characters might say 'Capitalist Running Dog' or 'Fred made this
> lacquer' for all I know.

Circa 1915, my father was living in a rooming house in NYC where there
was a shared bath for each floor. Someone had given him an attractive
black silk bathrobe or dressing gown covered with columns of Chinese
characters in yellow.

One day, on his way to the bath and wearing the robe, he encountered
the elderly Chinese man who lived on the same floor. So he stopped
his neighbor and asked, "Are these characters just made-up designs or
do they mean something?" The "Chinaman" (as it was then customary to
say) walked slowly around my father, gravely looking him up and down,
then walked away down the corridor, saying, "It mean, it mean. Hee hee
hee...it mean...ha ha heee it mean hee heeeeee snigger..."

Dad never wore the robe again, convincd that it exhibited some
terrible political, racist, sexual or other offensive slogan or
message.

--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353746 is a reply to message #353745] Mon, 02 October 2017 16:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Kerr-Mudd,John

Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote in
news:87vajx4b5p.fsf@bogus.nodomain.nowhere:

>
> Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> writes:
>
>> Presumably there is some way of representing the pronunciation of
>> non-Mandarin words using Mandarin characters. How it works I don't
>> know, but my colleague seemed fairly confident. Of course the
>> characters might say 'Capitalist Running Dog' or 'Fred made this
>> lacquer' for all I know.
>
> Circa 1915, my father was living in a rooming house in NYC where there
> was a shared bath for each floor. Someone had given him an attractive
> black silk bathrobe or dressing gown covered with columns of Chinese
> characters in yellow.
>
> One day, on his way to the bath and wearing the robe, he encountered
> the elderly Chinese man who lived on the same floor. So he stopped
> his neighbor and asked, "Are these characters just made-up designs or
> do they mean something?" The "Chinaman" (as it was then customary to
> say) walked slowly around my father, gravely looking him up and down,
> then walked away down the corridor, saying, "It mean, it mean. Hee hee
> hee...it mean...ha ha heee it mean hee heeeeee snigger..."
>
> Dad never wore the robe again, convincd that it exhibited some
> terrible political, racist, sexual or other offensive slogan or
> message.
>

Can it at last be revealed?
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353747 is a reply to message #353735] Mon, 02 October 2017 16:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Charles Richmond is currently offline  Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 10/2/2017 12:36 PM, Whiskers wrote:
> On 2017-10-02, Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> wrote:
>> On Mo 25 Sep 2017 at 19:27, Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I have an expensive Parker ball-point pen over 30 years old, with
>>> Chinese characters 'invisibly' etched into the polished lacquer. A
>>> colleague who could read Mandarin told me they have no meaning as such,
>>> but if pronounced would sound like 'paa ker'.
>>
>> Interesting; I always thought that chinese ideograms do not have an
>> inherent pronunciation apart from their meaning.
>> At least, that's what I#ve told in my mandarin course.
>>
>> 'Andreas
>
> Presumably there is some way of representing the pronunciation of
> non-Mandarin words using Mandarin characters. How it works I don't
> know, but my colleague seemed fairly confident. Of course the
> characters might say 'Capitalist Running Dog' or 'Fred made this
> lacquer' for all I know.
>

The Chinese tend to name things with roughly "sound alike characters".
Each dialect *does* pronounce those characters somewhat differently.

The meaning of those characters also often have some relationship.
"America" is written as "mei guo", but the characters also have the
meaning of "beautiful country". A "martini" is called "ma ti ni", but
the characters have the meaning "horse kick you".

--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353748 is a reply to message #353397] Mon, 02 October 2017 17:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hancock4 is currently offline  hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 2:27:31 PM UTC-4, Whiskers wrote:

> I have an expensive Parker ball-point pen over 30 years old, with
> Chinese characters 'invisibly' etched into the polished lacquer. A
> colleague who could read Mandarin told me they have no meaning as such,
> but if pronounced would sound like 'paa ker'.

A Western Union publication touted its fax service for sending
Chinese messages, since the language uses a character for a word
and there are a great many characters. It had a sample message.

I asked a Chinese co-worker to translate it, and she said it was
meaningless--just pen strokes that looked like Chinese lettering,
but not actual words.
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353754 is a reply to message #353746] Mon, 02 October 2017 18:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mike Spencer is currently offline  Mike Spencer
Messages: 997
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
"Kerr-Mudd,John" <notsaying@invalid.org> writes:

> Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote in
> news:87vajx4b5p.fsf@bogus.nodomain.nowhere:
>
>> The "Chinaman" (as it was then [1915] customary to say) walked
>> slowly around my father, gravely looking him up and down, then
>> walked away down the corridor, saying, "It mean, it mean. Hee hee
>> hee...it mean...ha ha heee it mean hee heeeeee snigger..."
>>
>> Dad never wore the robe again, convincd that it exhibited some
>> terrible political, racist, sexual or other offensive slogan or
>> message.
>>
>
> Can it at last be revealed?

Lost in the twisty little passages of time. Dad never learned what
the characters meant.

--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
Re: 1947--more on ink [message #353755 is a reply to message #353748] Mon, 02 October 2017 19:07 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Charles Richmond is currently offline  Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 10/2/2017 4:41 PM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 2:27:31 PM UTC-4, Whiskers wrote:
>
>> I have an expensive Parker ball-point pen over 30 years old, with
>> Chinese characters 'invisibly' etched into the polished lacquer. A
>> colleague who could read Mandarin told me they have no meaning as such,
>> but if pronounced would sound like 'paa ker'.
>
> A Western Union publication touted its fax service for sending
> Chinese messages, since the language uses a character for a word
> and there are a great many characters. It had a sample message.
>

Though each Chinese character often carries a meaning, like some word
parts in English (like "ped-" meaning foot" as in pedal, pedestrian,
etc.), a total "word" in Chinese is usually made up of two or three
characters. The character 電 means lightning (traditional, not
simplified form). It is used to mean electricity as a "prefix" for
words like telephone (電話 dian hua, for "electric talk") or computer (電腦
dian nao, for "electric brain") or movie (電影 dian ying. for "electric
shadows").

--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
Pages (2): [1  2    »]  Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Previous Topic: FCUG "picnic" lunch - Sunday, Oct. 15
Next Topic: Re: progress in e-mail, such as AOL
Goto Forum:
  

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Fri Mar 29 09:37:58 EDT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.07195 seconds