Is This The Most Vulgar Pen On The Planet?

[londonbooks]

The Montegrappa Chaos pen that so many people like to lambaste is a work of art that contains symbols representing Sylvester Stallone's working career as an actor. As I recognize each of the symbols on it, I appreciate it for what it is, which is an artistic expression. Sure it is expensive, far too expensive to be a working pen for most of us, but then so are the canvases of Dali and Mondrian too expensive for most of us to decorate our offices with. Works of craftsmanship and art do not appeal to all people, nor do they have to. Many makers make art in the form of pens. Some, like the products of the Krone company are even more excessive than either the "Buddha" pen, or the Chaos pen. I understand where most of you are coming from. You like pens because they feel good in the hand, while used to correspond and they promote better handwriting. Indeed, from that point of view my best pen is a plain black, unadorned item. If the iconography on Stallone's pen were less martial and aggressive, less associated with horror and violence, I suspect that it would not attract the opprobrium it does. However, if that were so, then it would miss the mark of the point it makes.

 

Well put !! Thanks for reminding me to keep an open mind - especially about art.

[Guernseytim]

 

Well put !! Thanks for reminding me to keep an open mind - especially about art.

Very true - if I think of it as art as opposed to a stylish utilitarian device then my viewpoint would be different. Even things I don't like (most of Tracy Emin or Damian Hurst's work) I can generally appreciate.

[Scrawler]

Very true - if I think of it as art as opposed to a stylish utilitarian device then my viewpoint would be different. Even things I don't like (most of Tracy Emin or Damian Hurst's work) I can generally appreciate.

The Chaos pen does not really have a utilitarian use in the sense of writing lengthy letters. It is far too heavy and cumbersome. But in keeping with its martial theme, it is a dominance baton. When thrust forward and aimed at the paper like a weapon, to places the final will of a person at the end of a contract, or agreement, such an item has utilitarian function, as well. In some situations, the pen has not been used just to correspond, but to establish the status and authority of the bearer. This pen is utilitarian for some kinds of people in some situations. Pens have symbolic value. That is why pens have been decorated, esteemed, and used to express our esteem for others. Why we give them at graduations, and why our war museums keep the pens that signed armistices, and why the offices of presidents preserve pens that were used to sign treaties. It is quite likely that one may find what a given pen stands for to be distasteful. In the same way as one may find what the artists mentioned here have produced distasteful. But in the case of the Chaos pen, it is successful artistic expression, which achieves every part of its reason for existing.

Edited May 28, 2014 by Scrawler

[pajaro]

How lovely! It rivals the Montblanc Catherine the Great and Peter the Great for sheer beauty. And so understated. To paraphrase Sheakespeare, "F*rting is such sweet sorrow."

[inkstainedruth]

How lovely! It rivals the Montblanc Catherine the Great and Peter the Great for sheer beauty. And so understated. To paraphrase Sheakespeare, "F*rting is such sweet sorrow."

You know, if it wasn't for those great honking caps, those would be fairly attractive pens (I actually like the elegance of the overlay on the barrel). Oh yeah, and then they went and put that great big white splat on the finial....

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

[AAAndrew]

The Chaos pen does not really have a utilitarian use in the sense of writing lengthy letters. It is far too heavy and cumbersome. But in keeping with its martial theme, it is a dominance baton. When thrust forward and aimed at the paper like a weapon, to places the final will of a person at the end of a contract, or agreement, such an item has utilitarian function, as well. In some situations, the pen has not been used just to correspond, but to establish the status and authority of the bearer. This pen is utilitarian for some kinds of people in some situations. Pens have symbolic value. That is why pens have been decorated, esteemed, and used to express our esteem for others. Why we give them at graduations, and why our war museums keep the pens that signed armistices, and why the offices of presidents preserve pens that were used to sign treaties. It is quite likely that one may find what a given pen stands for to be distasteful. In the same way as one may find what the artists mentioned here have produced distasteful. But in the case of the Chaos pen, it is successful artistic expression, which achieves every part of its reason for existing.

 

We're all talking about taste here. I appreciate your arguments, Scrawler. My training is in social-historical art history so can fully understand the use of artistic objects in negotiating our relationships, status, etc... with the rest of our society. So, from a purely intellectual perspective, I can see that a fair amount of skill was needed to create these pens, and that for the designers, it was a statement of their vision. For Sly Stone, it represents his works and has iconography clear enough for the meanest understanding. These pens can, and probably do for those who purchase them, externally represent and project their status, wealth, power, an extension of their inadequate anatomy, etc... ("dominance baton" indeed)

 

I'm almost offended by the Buddha pen as a former scholar of Buddhism. Its offense is artistic: the complete inappropriateness of the combination of iconography and materials. The Chaos pen is less offensive, it's blunt instrument approach to iconography matches completely the tone and aesthetics of his cinematic oeuvre.

 

There're still ugly and vulgar and I wouldn't pay 10-cents for them except to melt them down or sell them to some poor sap with more money than taste.

 

But that's just me. And in the end, they're someone else's problem, not mine.

[Algester]

I have seen more vulgar pens that when I see it I'll not want to write with it... clue its overly studded with diamonds

[raging.dragon]

I have seen more vulgar pens that when I see it I'll not want to write with it... clue its overly studded with diamonds

 

I've seen (pictures of) several different pens from several different brands matching that description.

[amk]

I actually rather like the Buddha pen, particularly the way it uses silver rather than gold. Gilded Buddha faces are traditional - in Thailand, smaller statues are often gilded by individual worshippers each applying a little square of gold leaf - so I don't see that as bling; and the whole pen has a soft lustre. Whether it's usable as a pen, and whether it's worth USD 35,000, are more debatable.

 

You want real vulgarity? Some of the Chinese bling pens like the Jinhao dragon and pearl pens are available at a much lower price point.

[inkstainedruth]

You want real vulgarity? Some of the Chinese bling pens like the Jinhao dragon and pearl pens are available at a much lower price point.

I see that you can click on the photo for an enlarged view. I, um, chose not to....

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

[Gloucesterman]

Well, so much for "non-attachment"!

 

it really is a paradox that the subject of a $35,000 fountain pen is the Buddha. Somehow, that's not what imagined as the way to honor his work.

 

Really, it's just my opinion.

[Scrawler]

Well, so much for "non-attachment"!

 

it really is a paradox that the subject of a $35,000 fountain pen is the Buddha. Somehow, that's not what imagined as the way to honor his work.

 

Really, it's just my opinion.

I felt the same way about the Montblanc Gandhi, even though it was a lot less expensive.

[elysee]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

 

As for vulgar, this word is defined as "lacking sophistication or good taste" or being "unrefined." Well, the design is certainly very sophisticated and intricate. While I may not be a believer in Buddha, others are and, thus, for them, a pen commemorating Buddha would be in good taste. Finally, the pen is made from silver and gold and it has a diamond. So, many would consider such a pen quite elaborate, artistic, and refined. Therefore, I cannot agree with your statement that this pen is "vulgar".

 

While this pen may not appeal to you, why denegrate it? There are many for whom such a pen is considered to be beautiful, artistic, and desireable.

[Mickey]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

 

As for vulgar, this word is defined as "lacking sophistication or good taste" or being "unrefined." Well, the design is certainly very sophisticated and intricate. While I may not be a believer in Buddha, others are and, thus, for them, a pen commemorating Buddha would be in good taste. Finally, the pen is made from silver and gold and it has a diamond. So, many would consider such a pen quite elaborate, artistic, and refined. Therefore, I cannot agree with your statement that this pen is "vulgar".

 

While this pen may not appeal to you, why denegrate it? There are many for whom such a pen is considered to be beautiful, artistic, and desireable.

 

I think you're making a number of dangerous assumptions. (Are there any other sort?) Some Buddhist's might consider a commercial product, one might even say a crassly commercial product depicting the Buddha to be in decidedly poor taste, i.e., a vulgar. How you doing with that Martyrdom of Saint Sebastian pencil holder?

 

The use or inclusion of precious materials doesn't necessarily make the object sophisticated or artistic. It merely makes it expensive. Gilding a t*rd doesn't magically transform it into art. It is also an exceedingly rare object which manages to be both elaborate AND refined. Haiku is refined, Rap is elaborate.

[Keyless Works]

It looks like excellent craftsmanship but it's pretty unappealing as an actual writing instrument.

Edited June 8, 2014 by Keyless Works

[elysee]

I think you're making a number of dangerous assumptions. (Are there any other sort?) Some Buddhist's might consider a commercial product, one might even say a crassly commercial product depicting the Buddha to be in decidedly poor taste, i.e., a vulgar. How you doing with that Martyrdom of Saint Sebastian pencil holder?

 

The use or inclusion of precious materials doesn't necessarily make the object sophisticated or artistic. It merely makes it expensive. Gilding a t*rd doesn't magically transform it into art. It is also an exceedingly rare object which manages to be both elaborate AND refined. Haiku is refined, Rap is elaborate.

Again, to each her/his own.

 

While the pen may not be to my liking, it may be to the liking of others. Why rip it apart?

 

I prefer to be positive. How about considering the craftsmanship, the care put into the creation of the pen, the design, the construction, ... ? Why not wonder at the pen maker's motivation or inspiration for the creation of the pen? What about considering the base materials or other aspects of the operation of the pen?

Edited June 8, 2014 by elysee

[Mickey]

Again, to each her/his own.

 

While the pen may not be to my liking, it may be to the liking of others. Why rip it apart?

 

I prefer to be positive. How about considering the craftsmanship, the care put into the creation of the pen, the design, the construction, ... ? Why not wonder at the pen maker's motivation or inspiration for the creation of the pen? What about considering the base materials or other aspects of the operation of the pen?

 

The answers are pretty simple. Pen manufacture is a business. Profit is usually the principle motive if one is in business. So, rather than imagining the motives of the manufacturer to be other than profit, which would be a violation fiscal responsibility to the company's stock holders, I assume management is trying to make money. I don't assume that they are trying to be offensive, only that creating moving, religious art is probably not their motivation. That's not to say that the profit motive automatically despoils the product, only that an artist/artisan's motives are very different from a corporation's. One might sacrifice profitability to make an artistic statement, the other isn't usually allowed to.

 

Understand please, neither care in the design and manufacture nor the highest motives guarantees artistic success or non-vulgarity (path to hell and all that...) or even proper function. I'm doubt the Edsel and Bricklin were intended to be boondoggles. Conversely, would Da Vinci's "Last Supper" be more "un-vulgar" if it had been executed with more stable materials, encrusted with jewels, or cast from 24K gold? Of course not. The quality of an object is the quality of the object, not the materials from which it was made nor the motives of its maker.

 

I think you may be missing something in your understanding of vulgarity. The root of vulgar is vulgus, meaning common people. So something which is vulgar is something that would appeal to a common person, someone with little education and no natural taste,* a person who, among his other deficits, wouldn't understand that price is not synonymous with value or worth. Such people could very well buy a tiara for a sow and declare it the queen. (It's really shocking how many times they have done this.)

 

* I'm not saying common people can't have taste. I simply explaining the word. Whether the vulgus are truly vulgar is a subject for another discussion.

[elysee]

I think you may be missing something in your understanding of vulgarity. The root of vulgar is vulgus, meaning common people. So something which is vulgar is something that would appeal to a common person, someone with little education and no natural taste,* a person who, among his other deficits, wouldn't understand that price is not synonymous with value or worth. Such people could very well buy a tiara for a sow and declare it the queen. (It's really shocking how many times they have done this.)

 

* I'm not saying common people can't have taste. I simply explaining the word. Whether the vulgus are truly vulgar is a subject for another discussion.

Hmm, the "common people"???????????? education?????????? taste??????????

 

To the farmer who raised it and the judges who evaluated it, among others, the blue ribbon winning sow is the queen and its blue ribbon is a tiara. To the master chef, such a a sow is a wonder worthy of a creative, four-star culinary creation. To those who pay a fortune to dine on this creation produced from this award winning sow, there is nothing vulgar in this queenly sow.

[Runnin_Ute]

It isn't my taste, but the craftsmanship that went into it is certainly something to be admired. It is highly unlikely that whoever buys it will actually use it to write with. More of a display object/"trailer queen" than anything else. And even then it would probably spend most of its life in a wall safe.

[Mickey]

Hmm, the "common people"???????????? education?????????? taste??????????

 

Don't blame me. I didn't make up the word nor its most popular (another word referring to the people) connotation. Blame them pesky Romans and Old Englishmen.