53 replies to this topic

[dcarmell]

Isn't there something of a conundrum in one theme running through this discussion, in that there are been some scorn poured on the heads (by some, not all!) of mere users of vintage pens, yet the topic is restoration standards!  I can't help but think that Vivek's non-restoration standard is almost more appropriate for pens that will not be used.

I do understand that museum grade items do undergo restoration, so I guess where I am thinking re-saccing, some of you are thinking of that type of restoration.  It would help me to hear some examples of restoration work that might be done to a pen that would not be used.

Interesting dicussion, though!

best, Dan

[Roger W.]

Dan;

Good points.  I've long stopped sacing most of my pens as they are primarily collector pieces and the restoration follows your museum line of reasoning, I think.  Like the Sterling slotted Sheaffer, the lever had been yanked out so I had a like barrel placed into the overlay with an intact lever.  I had a Self-Filling #8 with a broken clip so I had the inner cap pulled and a like nickel clip installed from a donor pen.  All original parts replacing identically broken parts.  No embellishments or enhancements to the pens originality or historic presentation.

I'm using a user grade circa 1920 Sheaffer gold filled #3 right now.  It has substantial wear to the gold fill at the end of the barrel but, it is a fine writer.  So there is nothing so much against using vintage pens but more against using collector grade vintage pens because "pens were meant to be written with" crap.  Many fine vintage pieces have crossed over the line and are to be preserved for their own sake.  Why ink an as new 1925 Sheaffer Secretary with original price sticker on the end of the barrel?  This is a museum quality piece and though it was built for writing it deserves to be appreciated for the "artifact", "piece of art", etc. that it has surely become.  I hope that clarifies my position on user grade and collection pieces and why collection pieces aren't meant to be written with.  Makes as much sense as spending a mint 1917 quarter because it was meant for circulation.

Roger W.

[Rob Astyk]

Hi, All,

WoW! This is an exciting thread.

Roger, we differ on inking pens and a bit on "museum quality" pieces. I have to admit that my egalitarian tendencies take over here.

A old pen, say from the 1920s, that's in like-new condition is harder to find than a moderately well used example of the same pen. Being very pristine, it's in better condition and probably worth a small premium.

If it still has its price band it's still more unusual and worthy of an additional premium over the like-new pen.

If it's in its original box, that's still more unusual and gets an additional premium.

If it's got the original package insert with instructions and advertising, again it gets a further premium and rightly so.

If it's got some verifiable provenance, like the original sales receipt or "Merry Christmas, 1925" etc., I think a further premium is fair. In this category I would include original, professional engraving/name imprint.

But a premium just for never having been in contact with ink? I think that's silly. It invites fraud. I have several pens with intact price stickers and bands with which I've written a number of times. Once I've cleaned them not you or anyone else is going to know that they ever held ink. And there's no high end collector who wouldn't shell out big bucks for my "mint, uninked" Senior Chreedisfranne if I were a con-artist who could live with himself after pulling such a fraud.

In some sense it comes down to the false dichotomy in Dan's post and some of Viv's comments about "surgery" on pens. First let me say that there are pens that should be treated gently and very respectfully doe to age, rarity or just general quality and condition. But the distinction between "user grade" and "museum quality" pens is actually one of the factors that invites those "back alley abortions" of which Viv speaks and one of which, performed by Dr. FrankenTardiff set me off on this thread initially. Demeaning one pen by calling it "user grade" simply further inflates the value of the already inflated "museum quality" piece.

I'd like to follow Viv's analogy a little without wrenching this over into a political discussion. Please understand that I'm using this as an analogy for pens and not a spark that belongs rightly in the Hot Buttons Forum.

Even when abortions were illegal in the United States, abortions were performed. The only thing that changed, first in New York, and then nationally with Roe v. Wade, was the availability of abortions. Women with the cash and connections could end a pregnancy at any time they wished through the first 70 years of this century. It was middle class and poor women who didn't have access to abortion. The uproar came when that privilege of the rich was democratized by Roe v. Wade and monied interests started financing terrorists, like Operation Rescue and Eric Robert Rudolph,  to regain their privilege. After all, it's not a privilege of wealth and status if those riff-raff who are better off on cots in the Astrodome than in their homes in pre-Katrina New Orleans (per Barbara Bush) can avail themselves of the privilege too.

So, Viv, yes, as long as there are people with money and pens who have the morals and ethics of some scorpion or, worse, Karl Rove, there will be abortions performed. The monied will pay some Dr. FrankenTardiff to "abort" a perfectly lovely and rare pen. But we can make it difficult. (Hey! Look! I'm going into "Operation Rescue" mode myself.) We can make things like reblackening detestable, back-alley procedures and eliminate them entirely by setting standards that require a reduction in the value of the pen for such meddling. We can start convincing people that the Parker 51 that cost you $75 and another $50 or so for the bogus "music" nib is now worth $35 on the open market because it's been screwed up.

The monied may be able to buy whatever privilege they please, but the one thing that they will NOT do is lose money. If their pen is worth less altered than it is in original condition, their urge to alter the pen will disappear like trash after the maid comes through.

Roger, the repairs to the pens that you've described seem entirely appropriate to me. Swapping parts from parts pens to a needy contemporary of the donor seems right and good to me unless you're ruining a perfectly good pen to do it. If the donor was incomplete or damaged or otherwise no longer useable I have no objection to swapping parts. I you're cannibalizing an otherwise complete and collectable but common pen to make your unusual model complete and more valuable, I'm going to part company with you.

As for your 0552 1/2V, Dennis, as I indicated in an earlier post, I'm a little queasy about replacing the cap. It can be done and, as you suggest, by buffing all traces of chasing out of a chased cap and then making the replacement. And, yes, 52 1/2Vs are plentiful and cheap. Just make sure that you've got a cap of the correct diameter inside and out and the correct length that screws onto your barrel correctly without damaging the nib and, finally, comes from a real beater. Once you've performed the transplant, may I suggest that inside the cap lip you carefully incise something on the order of "DB 10/2005" and fill that inscription (which needn't be large) with some white epoxy so that the inscription is permanent and visible. That way everyone will know that you rebuilt the pen this year.

I'm not against all repairs but I am against repairs that don't own up to being repairs and of which there is no record for subsequent owners.

Finally, Viv, I'm not entirely with you on considering every pen an artifact worthy of preservation, slippery slopes not withstanding, bit I am in favor of, as I said before, treating every pen as if it were a museum quality artifact until and unless you know that it's not. If you've never seen one before and no one else knows anything about it, then that pen is worthy of some reverence. once you find out that Fred Krinke has a couple hundred of them in better condition than yours. You can revise your decision on how you wish to treat the pen then.

Take care,

Rob Astyk

[dcarmell]

Now, I understood--and agree with--Roger's response to my email.  Certainly replacing a damaged part with a better (hopefully perfect!) replacement part is a good thing to do in my book.  And I certainly understand not saccing a pen that is too pristine (too "minty"!!!!), especially those that can discolor with a sac inside spewing fumes.

But, Rob, let me see if I understand what you are saying (because you made several points in your post).  You're suggesting I made a false dichotomy in my previous post because, you would say, a pristine pen can and should be used gently, that is, written with.  But you don't like the distinction between museum grade (i.e., mint or the dreaded near-mint) and user grade, because it invites fraud.  

I would suggest that that this distinction depending on inking and the valuation of un-inked pens (as you point out).  After all, as David has suggested, a knowledgeable collector can inspect a pen and come to their conclusion about the degree of wear on the pen, as well as whether components of the pen are original--or not, with some degree of certainty.  I don't think a museum would care about whether a pen was inked, but would value a pen in the gradients you outline (condition, case, supporting materials).  So if collectors weren't obsessed with un-inked pens ("mint") this particular aspect of fraud would disappear (let me add that I find the obsession with un-inked modern LEs to be very odd indeed).

So, my conclusion is that the restoration standards you are talking about in principle involve standards that use original parts and that do not falsely camouflage wear.  In addition, you object to the alteration of pens and parts that remove them from the pool of "useable" pens and parts available for collecting.  All this makes sense to me.  I assume you don't object to reverseable mutations, like the Monogram HR EDs that both Nathan and David will fit with a Sheaffer nib.  

What I am aware of, as a self-described user/collector of modest means, is that people like me are useful in supporting the hobby.  Other than very common pens, like Snorkels and 51s, I am not likely to get my hands on pristine pens.  So the rare birds are safe from me.  And, although it has taken education from forums like this, I prefer to support repair people whose standards are much like what I think you support and to get my pens restored to use in a conservative way (as Roger pointed out, this is why I send my plunger-fillers to Nathan to correct restoration).  However, I am guilty of having vintage pens retipped and ground to suit me, I must admit!

In further and particular defence of Nathan, the bad handwriting you cite as resulting from his retips is--as deplicted in photos he circulates--his own and his handwriting is not exactly copperplate.  Unless you have seen other examples, it may not be fair to attack him on those grounds.  And while I understand your objections to some of what he does, Nathan also is a force in re-generating interest in fountain pens as interesting, economical, and practical writing instruments and that is, I believe, a very good thing.

Here's a side question: given the general disapproval of reblackening HR, how do you feel about replating trim?

Great discussion, not least because I spotted a pen on David's website I want to pick up--once I get the brakes on my car fixed!  Don't sell it in NYC, David!

best, Dan

[einv]

i still continue to maintain my original position, which is that a pen, unless it is to be used on a daily basis and even then only if the user is squeamish in regards to unsightliness on part of its defects, does not need to be and ought not to be meddled with in the name of restoration.

let us consider a hypothetical example: say a firearm that is battlescarred and bloodied after having seen action. i claim that repairing or replacing the broken parts, wiping off the grime, and oiling the machine makes it about as historically devoid of interest as any of the similar cookie-cutter firearms produced in that era.

who knows what might have caused the crack in the pen in question? maybe it was some great writer's pen when he fell off the turnip truck, and the crack faithfully recorded the momentous event. in that case, how can someone in this century, without adequate information, presume even for purposes of just exhibition in a museum that the defect needed to be repaired?

the pen that is left absolutely alone is the pen that contains most information. anything over and above that is meddling, tampering, and historically incorrect.

once you let it be known that "some degree of restoration is OK" that invites a pandora's box. in whose opinion is restoration necessary? what for you and me seems a perfectly ship-shape cap, will seem to an expert dentbuster to be cratered like the moon. what to some may seem a wonderful expressive nib might seem to others to require either castration through a nib grinder, or fattening from a retipper. and this consortium you speak of that dictates what is appropriate restoration and what is not will be rife with politics: admit one person who does restoration work A, and you will need to admit his friend and crony who does restoration work type B. and there will end up being ostracism on a purely arbitrary basis, such as seen here toward one lone repairman, simply because the majority have decided that his work is generally too outlandish and eccentric to fall into the comfortable rubrics of restoration that most agree upon, sort of a universal mutual pat-each-other-in-back cabal.

[Roger W.]

Viv;

Still waiting for you to make any sense at all - I mean remotely.  If a pen is found cracked we will never know what did it so who cares!  Damn all those people for restoring antique cars, they should be piles of rust by now because that is what nature does so they are bastardising the process by stopping them from rusting.  The original buyer of a pen in 1920 might have hoped to get twenty years mileage out of it so perhaps in their honor and memory pens from the 20's should be destroyed now - don't hesitate on this Viv, get to destroying them because lord knows the original owner expected it and it is an abomination to keep the things around.

Museums should be full of unrestored crap artifacts but, no, that's not proper restoration and collector pieces should be retored and maintained to a condition as close to an historic representation of that piece but, without artificially enhancing the piece.  You can use original parts as replacement parts on the pen that you wish to have in a well preserved collectable state.  To me, a consumate collector, your theory is backward.  I would do little to fix up a user, beyond what was necessary, and much more to preserve a collector piece.  I would restore the piece in a fairly conservative fasion though and, I think, that is where we are talking about "how much is too far?"

Roger W.

[einv]

roger, i think what you are advocating is a practical philosophy of collecting, while i am advocating a non-intervention sort. i do not for a moment believe that a pen if left unrestored will fall apart like a car would, for instance leaving a car unpainted will cause it to rust and eventually collapse. very few analogs of that exist in the pen world. if it is assessed that the crack will propagate spontaneously or from mere storage, then i think we will all agree that it is in the best interests of the pen to do something. but if the crack is a non-functional flaw not inimical to the pen's long term health, i say leave it alone. i think you would say, why not restore it if it makes me and those who see it happier?

far from being backward, i feel it is user pens that need to be 'weathered' if you will, so they are up to the rigors of being used daily. for instance, it is OK to preserve an antique unrestored and half-decayed auto in a climate-controlled condition in a museum, but i think we agree that if this same auto were to be made roadworthy, then a major overhaul is required, including changing its wheels, and sprucing up its engine (retipping?) to make it worthy of today's high speeds and roads.

[Roger W.]

far from being backward, i feel it is user pens that need to be 'weathered' if you will, so they are up to the rigors of being used daily. for instance, it is OK to preserve an antique unrestored and half-decayed auto in a climate-controlled condition in a museum, but i think we agree that if this same auto were to be made roadworthy, then a major overhaul is required, including changing its wheels, and sprucing up its engine (retipping?) to make it worthy of today's high speeds and roads.

Viv;  

I begin to see your point but still strongly disagree.  While we can make your car road worthy with some effort it will take far greater effort to make it a show car or a museum piece.  While a meseum could choose to have it be a climate controlled piece of crap they aren't likely to do this are they?

As far as retipping, this may very well be veiwed as an enhancment and not preservation.  But a good clip to replaced a broken one merely returning the pen to it's historical beginings - actually relating to the viewer the true nature of what the piece was meant to be.  A broken clip may represent the individual pieces' history it does not, however reflect the historical representation of what was originally meant.  Not merely a question of making me "happier".

Roger W.

[Rob Astyk]

Hi, David, et al.,

Since starting the thread on inking pens [Inka Dinka Do?] I have been rereading the threads in this forum as time permits and came upon this message that seemed out of context.

A minor comment:

Rob Morrison's pens would have done fine without the background story; mint is mint, and these were standard production pieces.

Who mentioned Rob Morrison and where? He certainly was not the cobbler of custom "original" Waterman 7s in my story and so far I haven't found his name mentioned except in this message. I'm a bit puzzled by this is all.

Take care,

Rob Astyk

[Tinker]

Rob,

Look at ElaineB long commentary just above David's comment. She says:

I think back to Rob Morrison's eBay auctions a couple of months ago, for the breathtaking pens he snagged from a local estate (that turquoise Waterman Patrician and that mint Chilton pen/pencil set. I -think- it was Chilton...)  I would be willing to bet that his auctions would not have had the response they did, even with such fabulous pieces, had he not also provided the background information about where the pens had been all these years. It was reassuring that these were the genuine thing, and a collector would not get burned on their investment.

BTW - anyone heard from ElaineB? She seems to have dropped off of here and FPN back in September.

John

[halljer]

Ok, let's take this out of the realm of the theoretical and put it into the sphere of reality.  I was fortunate enough to acquire a Waterman 0502 that is nearly pristine except for a few things.  On the cap, it has a small ding on the very top end.  On the uninscribed banner through the snail pattern, it also has a small ding.  The nib has a crack.  Now, I know that some in the pen world have done wonders removing the small dings, and others can do magic with old flexi nibs.  Should I pursue having the dings extracted, making the pen more aestheticly perfect?  Should I have the nib replaced or repaired?  Would such alterations or restorations be "unethical" or would they be more true to the collector's creed of restoring old and rare examples of the pen industry?  I look forward to your comments.

Best to all,
Jerry

[Roger W.]

Jerry;

You make good points.  I've had precious few pens repaired but, I've been tempted to have a BCHR that is fine in everyway except that it laid only one way in it's time in some UV - got a nice brown stripe.  I'm leaving it, as there is no original or proper method of fixing this.  As to dings in metal we are talking about a fix that will return the pen to original condition without any negative side effects IMHO.  Some might say it would destroy the pens history.  History of what?!?  Dings?!?  It is not useful data to save dings in a pen.  

The cracked nib is a bit more difficult.  The original factory fix would have been nib replacement I think.  So that is the first option and, again, no useful data that pen nibs cracked, IMHO.  Some nibs are real hard to come by.  I'm looking for a Boston #5 (got one to spare, Rob?).  So if I had a cracked one I think it is fair to have it repaired.  Reasonable attempt to restore a pen to working or workable order - now is that a good sentiment or does it need refined a bit?

Repairs with original parts and/or original factory methods, I think, would be fair game as any pen could have received this treatment already from the maker.

Roger W.

[Dennis B]

Roger,

I posted this in another thread before, but I had a Waterman 14, MHR, about 100 years old.  Early NY imprint nib with a broken tine.  To me, having the nib repaired rather than replacing it with a non-identical nib, was the right thing to do.

Here's a pic of the nib before and after repair (by John Mottishaw).


(Those are reflections on the nib, not cracks)

Seemed right to me though someone may disagree.

Cheers,

Dennis B

[Rob Astyk]

Hi, John, Jerry, Roger, et al.,

Thank you, John, for pointing that out. I missed Elaine's mention of Rob Morrison and just couldn't figure out what David was talking about.

The bit with the dings, Jerry, is not a big deal. Removing them will cause the site to weaken slightly as will any working and reworking of the base metal but it's not that significant. Nor are the dings themselves significant. I don't think that anyone's destroying the exciting history of the pen's rolling against the compass in its period desk drawer by removing them. On the other hand, it's kind of like cutting the face of your ex-spouse/partner out of all the old family photos. They were there. Forever afterward in your mind those points will be the places where the ding used to be. So why spend the money? But if you feel that it will be better that way, go ahead.

As for Elaine, I thought I saw a post from her just a couple of days ago. I do know that she's had a bit of a rough time recently but seemed a lot betterwhen I heard from her a couple of weeks ago.

Take car,

Rob Astyk