Hello,

Does anyone know which current production ink comes the closest to matching Carolina blue?

Thanks,
Lisa (proud UNC alum)

I would try either Conway Stewart Blue or Diamine Royal Blue. Carolina Blue is not a standard color for fountain pen inks because it is a light, bright blue -- without any turquoise elements, which rules out such colors as Waterman South Seas Blue. Most blue inks are too dark and have an unpleasant resemblance to Duke Blue.

I should know. Four of the best years of my life were spent at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.... but that was 35 years ago!

Go Tar Heels!

I would love to find some too, but so far nothing straight from the bottle that I have run across works. I've been tempted a few times to try Pear Tree's sampler so I could try to mix some PR Daphne Blue and PR Naples Blue, since it should be somewhere between there. It would also come close to something between Diamine Steel Blue and Diamine Aqua Blue. The closest I have seen was on an earlier thread where someone produced a CMYK color chart of Noodler's. Apparently 1 part Noodler's Blue to 6 parts Whiteness of the Whale got pretty close. I would try that myself, except I haven't found anyone that still has Whiteness of the Whale in stock. I will be watching this thread.

Cameron (another proud UNC alum)

I was thinking about applying to UNC for law school. But then I met their representatives ...

Please don't judge the rest of the South's finest university by the behavior of some law school representatives. At the risk of possibly offending some of my fellow Carolina alums, let me say that, in the 1970s, the law school didn't enjoy the same stellar national reputation as did the mainstream programs in the College of Arts and Sciences.

Much as I hate to say this.... Duke and Virginia have much better law schools.

Heh ... sorry, I should put my comment differently.

I was, and am, considering applying to UNC for law school. I was disappointed at the arrogance, in fact stupid arrogance, of a very high level administrator from the admissions department of the law school whom I met recently. His comments confirmed for me many suspicions which I had held about UNC, and although I would never make a decision about a school on the basis of a single person's representation, I do feel that his behavior was ... what's the metaphor ... enough of a straw to break the camel's back? Enough of a tip to suggest a legitimately giant iceberg?

I am still likely to apply to UNC, and I do have numbers to merit admission there (I think; it's just a guess, of course, though an educated one). But my personal "character" or "style," as I hope to represent in my essay and other supporting material, will be so different from what UNC seems to be seeking, and from what UNC deliberately represents itself to be pro-actively in the market of trying to increase on campus, that in case of any borderline or "soft" factors, I and UNC are very bad matches.

I found that UNC is looking for people who might increase "elitism" content by studying post-structuralist law, urban literary theory, modern jargon, and excess reliance on political correctness. The representative actually said, and I quote as best I can remember, "There are no unique students. We want people who will further the cause of fighting patriarchal hegemonies." Though it's possible he is a single loonie whose bizarre (and unfounded) generalizations have nothing to do with the school, I think instead, and I've backed this up with a lot of other research, that his comments are actually quite accurately representative of the school's intents.

I did my time in academia. I want a practical school which will make me a lawyer, not a theoretical place that will propound further post-structuralist idiocies about hegemonies, phallogocentrism, the idea that Shakespeare was really a Cherokee lesbian. I can vaguely appreciate how these preposterous falsehoods can find a beach-head in some field where interpretation yields academic papers for tenure-track minor scholars; for a field like, say, Comparative Literature. But when they rear their ugly heads in a field where the new interpretations actually impact people's lives, for instance in jail sentences, punitive damages, patrimony, life and death? No, thank you, reality please. I don't do post-modern jargon and "interpretive strategies" any more. I saw how they fool otherwise normal people, and ruin scholarship in the name of publishability. So I don't do them. UNC evidently does, however; or, at least, wants to represent itself as doing them. Too bad for them, I won't be a good match.

In fact, Duke was also ridiculously politically correct. (After the lacrosse affair, I'd have thought they would have realized the hazards!) I didn't find them jargon-o-centric or interested in post-modernism; just interested in being nasty to anyone white. Anyway, I don't have the numbers to get into Duke or UVa -- I've been out of school 20 years, I'll be lucky to get into UNC at my current stats. It's ridiculous how numerical it all is, but I had one bad day on the LSAT, so I have to settle for something a bit less elitist than I'm used to. It will probably be good for me, to escape the loftier climes of academia and go somewhere "realistic" and "practical." And non-post-structuralist.

Sounds like you need to focus on law schools without the big national reputations. The sad truth is that, once a law school has a reputation, it acquires a bit of arrogance (sometimes a lot of arrogance!). There are plenty of law schools in this country that focus strictly on preparing students to practice law, without all the fluff that accompanies having a national reputation.

First, congratulations on tackling the application process to law school. That in of itself is a huge accomplishment.

A few thoughts regarding your comments about "arrogance," and "elitism" that you've encountered... You may come to find this to be more the norm rather than the exception.

Law schools, and for the most part most graduate programs, foster this because (1) they can and (2) it is to their benefit. They want to attract the best candidates, and if you look at the number of applicants versus vacant spots -- they have the pick of the litter and call the shots from the get-go.

Law school, as I'm sure you know, is not for the faint-hearted, and going in you will come upon arrogance everywhere you turn. That is not a complaint; it's a fact. The first time you and a law professor lock eyes, you will know what arrogance really is -- and you will, believe me, be thankful for it. Years down the line, you will remember those sessions and will want to thank them for putting you down and viciously attacking you among your peers. It's a "depantsing" most 1L students do not forget -- and most are grateful for the experience years later when they are locking eyes with a Judge in a courtroom, a worthy "opponent" on the other side of your case, a senior partner at the law firm, or a client who will not accept anything but your best work product.

Even the most "liberal" minded law schools foster this environment because they believe it will prepare you to think and practice in an adversarial system. But the cooperation you will find from your fellow students is what will teach you to be a true lawyer at the end.

Law school will only provide you a foundation of legal knowledge. Rarely do law schools teach the "practical" aspects of law practice. That is not their job. Law school teaches you to think, to analyze, to pick everything apart. It teaches you to see things in every possible angle and to argue both sides of every argument -- even sides you never thought you could argue or want to argue.

I was accepted to UCLA Law School, Stanford Law School, and UC Berkeley's Boalt School of Law -- arguably the finest in what California has to offer in legal education. I attended UCLA as an undegrad and wanted to expand beyond the Los Angeles area. My parents nixed the idea of me moving to San Francisco because in their admittedly narrow view of the world, they feared I would return a marijuana addict and a hippy (laughing at it now, but at the time I was not amused). But where you attend is not as important as to "how" you attend and your attitude (or lack thereof, come to think of it) about your three years there.

Good luck and I hope you find the law school that you feel best meets your needs.

Sorry for the thread hijack... In my feeble attempt to get back on topic: I offer CS Blue to match Carolina blue that the OP was looking for -- it's "light" just like UNC's basketball team. UCLA's blue is much more vibrant -- like Waterman Florida Blue. I'm not attempting to start a flame-war, but facts are facts, people!

It was as inevitable as death and taxes.... that a thread about Carolina would sooner or later attract the UCLA gang!

Has CS changed its formula for blue? Mine (bought last summer) looks exactly the same as Sheaffer blue, which in turn isn't much different from Florida Blue.

Simon

Great to know there are fellow Tar Heels here!

Cliff -- good luck with the law school application process. My own humble degree was in education. Teaching was not the career for me. I am now studying clinical trials research at a local community college.

Oh, dear. I was afraid no off-the-shelf ink would be quite the color I wanted. And I've already sold my Private Reserve ink mixing kit AND my Noodler's Whiteness of the Whale. Oh well, it might be fun to play mad scientist.

I love basketball season! It brings out the optimist in everyone.

Lisa

Levenger has a "Skies of Blue" ink. I have never used it or even seen it on the page, but wasn't it Charles Kuralt who claimed the proof that God is a Tar Heel is that he made the sky Carolina Blue?

Is this the color you are trying to match.... just to be sure before I give my opinion


Or is this closer to the color...

Try looking here.

Minor thread hijack:

CharlieB and GirlieG33K: yup, I pretty much agree with your comments. I'm well into considering and dealing with those issues (elitism; theory; political correctness) as I continue my application process, so they're not new to me. I already spent considerable time amid the pie-in-the-sky PC types while doing my doctoral studies on medieval literature. Life in the humanities is even more rarefied and irratonally theory-obsessed than law could ever be, since a journal article in law actually might have REAL bearing on someone's wellbeing some day, whereas a journal article in ... say ... medieval vernacular bibliography, probably won't. So people feel more free to go off on wild goose chases. I didn't fit in.

I do indeed intend to go to a school which will be "practical" but I have to define practical in two different ways. First, there's the issue of making sure I can "hit the ground running" in whichever field of law I end up. I don't want to be so pie-in-the-sky, myself, that I can write a lot of papers about whether or not America needs a fourth branch of federal government or a less adversarial arbitration procedure at the appeals court level, but I can't present a discovery motion or get to the court in a nice outfit on time. So, obviously, "practical" can simply mean, "knows how to be a productive member of a legal workforce team."

But there's also the issue of getting a good job. If I attend one of the no-name schools which is emailing me offers of thousands of bucks plus free tuition without my having even applied to them, will I get out with enough of an education that I am in any way hire-able? Or will I simply have a useless J.D. on my business card, and three years' enjoyable time amid college girls (hey, it's starting to sound fun ...), and not really be any more employable then than I already am now.

One major reason I'm attending law school at this late date in my career, is that I essentially don't have a career. I'm 42 and consistently still trapped in entry-level positions (or, if the employers offer a position which has some panache to the title, it's still an entry-level salary). There are a lot of reasons for this: partly, I haven't ever found work which is so fulfilling that I'd do it for the joy of it in exchange for just a living wage so, I'm already the disgruntled party; partly, I'm in fields where there really isn't a living wage (non-profit volunteering, publishing, academic teaching), such that a large amount of the workforce is "idle rich" and their children enjoying themselves in part-time jobs which give them a sense of meaning but whose participation can drive the salary market down to where I can't afford to stay; partly, I'm too smart and educated for the people who have gravitated to these unprofitable fields -- people who couldn't hack a more competitive environment because of their lack of innate mental skills or education, for instance, tend to be supervising me, and I'm not exactly the sort of guy whom a typically anti-intellectual American football jock wants to have hangin' round beating doors open with his forehead.

In my mind's eye, therefore, I imagine the law as a chance to "up the ante." Enough money that I can afford to work only one job, rather than having to moonlight (in order to afford rent and food) but then being discredited from one of my jobs for failing to volunteer spare time on the weekend or after hours (I had to go to the other job!). Enough competitiveness and difficulty that the people who end up there are people with whom I "fit in" in terms of academic accomplishment and general mental skills. Enough long-term prospects that any investment in an early-level position where pay-for-work is a bad ratio, that this apprenticeship can rightly be viewed as an investment in a future "career" rather than simply as yet another secretarial position at the start of a long line of secretarial positions.

I'm a very bright guy. I have an excellent education. I am quite productive at work. I get there on time, do the work, do as much extra as my other job will allow, wear the professional clothes, know how to handle clients and customers and superiors, am "promoted" in terms of responsibilities and authority often enough: more than most. But I don't generally receive a living wage. (No, I mean that literally. My last 85-hours-a-week professional position, which required about six trips PAID FOR OUT OF MY OWN POCKET to Washington DC, NYC, and LA, per year, paid less than $20K. Full benefits tho'.) I need to be in a "real" field (the law?) rather than a "play" field. In publishing, in non-profiteering, in academia, there are an awful lot of people who have ended up in my circumstances; doing good work but not getting ahead. In fact, for most of my jobs, it has COST me to continue to work, simply in order to cover basic requirements like professional clothing, maintaining a car, and going on airplane rides to sales conferences. It would have been cheaper to just walk out.

So, you see what I'm looking for in the law. A change for the better. I realize most of my argument in favor of me attending a law school is, in fact, simply an argument for greater income and status. I doesn't have much to do with why I should do law; not law rather than business, or law rather than optometry. I do have a number of things in my favor for law: excellent mental skills, work experience in preparing documents in a timely and accurate manner, even a base assumption that is a need for all positions in an argument to be well represented. But those things are, to me, things which come to the fore in any profession, though they may be quite useful for doing well in law school. To me, the REAL reason I want to go to law school is, that without further certification and a higher degree, I can't afford to eat.

Griz, only the first picture is visible. But it appears to be similar, at least on my monitor.

Lisa

Notwithstanding the psychobabble you are hearing from faculty, go to the best law school that you can get into. It will likely give you more opportunities to get a job after graduation, although these days it's even more important than ever to be high in the class to have the most throw weight for recruiting. The education that you will get will not be different from what you would get a a more run-of-the-mill institution. Law school is essentially trade school, no matter what the faculty tells you. Girlieg33 is correct that it is mostly about teaching yourself to teach yourself and how to "think" like a lawyer. Mostly, you teach yourself by doing the reading and figuring it out. You really learn the trade once you are in the trenches. What practical training you do get tends toward litigation, and everybody freaks out when they are first asked to draft a partnership agreement or bond indenture, if you end up in the transactional area.

You may be getting into law for the same reason many of us did: it's the best paying option for a humanities grad. Be careful what you wish for though. For many in the profession, it's just a way to make a living. Many are truly miserable at it, but get the golden handcuffs on. There is a much higher a&&h^%e per thousand ratio in the law profession than the general population. Law firms are not warm and fuzzy places (picture a 55 year old man asking at the top of his lungs whether you have s*^t for brains--it happened to a friend of mine at the hands of one of my former partners). There are elements of craft involved in drafting pleadings, briefs, and documents, and there are opportunities to indulge the baser side of your nature in plotting litigation or negotiation strategies, all of which can be satisfying. For most of us, it's difficult to see clearly how we are making the world a better or more just place, although once in awhile that happens too. It does pay the bills pretty well though.

Sorry for the thread drift. I was a Carolina undergraduate back in the lower Pleistocene and the topic caught my eye.

Warning: more law school talk (lawyers just can't resist reliving the torture)

I'll stress Chip's message about class rank. Class rank after your first year is key. Law review is also key. This was not what I was after in law school at all, but it's what 95% of your classmates will be after. Geography is also key once you get out of the top 10 to 20 schools. In Richmond, Virginia, you'd be better off with a University of Richmond degree than a UNC degree. You'd be better off with a UNC degree than a degree from the University of Iowa. Firms hire who they know. If I were after the big regional firm job with the big salary, I'd attend a school in the region that would give me a scholarship and at which I felt I could make law review.

Everyone should be aware that there are two big bells in the compensation of attorneys: a bubble right around $50k and one right around $90k. If you want that big salary, you're going to be working for a big firm billing 2000+ hours a year (and likely working an additional 1000 hours that aren't billed). If you don't absolutely love working like a dog and specifically doing what you'll be doing, I would have to imagine that it would be constant torment. I'm the other breed of attorney: I work with a group of 5 attorneys and have a good quality of life doing the one area of law I love, but the pay isn't what some of my classmates are pulling down. There is a reason alcoholism is rampant among attorneys, and it's not because everyone is happy. It's a great calling that can lead to a number of different opportunities, but it punishes those who put money above all else.

Not to get all Pantone obsessive - but that's Carolina Blue

I'm a Tarheel Born and a Tarheel Bred
And when I die I'm a Tarheel Dead
So it's rah-rah Carolina-lina
Rah-rah Carolina-lina
Rah-rah Carolina
Go to Hell State!

Carolina Blue is pantone 278 (yes, my Carolina nerd-dom is on display). It's an unlikely color for FP ink because it provides very low contrast on white paper. I've given up on the idea of writing with the color, but I'm still on the lookout for a pen in just the right shade!

Thanks RunNJump - I knew another alum would out-obsessive/compulsive me.

I'll file that away for TailGate time for the Carolina Cup next month.

Hark the Sound of TarHeel Voices
Ringing Clear and True
Singing Car-o-li-na's praises
Shouting NCU
Hail to the Brightest Star of All
Clear its Radience Shine
Carolina Priceless Gem
Receive All Praises Thine.

Yay for all the Old Wellers who hang around here! I have to share my favorite Carolina quote: "Far from forgetting the blessed place, I think my memory of it grows clearer every year.... It was as close to magic as I've ever been."

Having juggled subjects in this thread, let me sincerely address Lisa's question about ink that would closely match Carolina blue. As I left for work yesterday morning, I hummed that familiar James Taylor tune and my mind was still on the various light blue inks that I've come across... The sky was grey and overcast in the morning, so it wasn't until I looked out my office window around noon time that some possibilities came to me. Here is a list of blues that you might want to consider in your search for Carolina blue.

- Conway Stewart Blue: Despite my earlier swipe at UNC's basketball team and how CS Blue's "lightness" would compliment it, I was serious when I recommended it. CS Blue really is one of the lightest blues that has no purple or turquoise tinge to it. Here is my review on CS Blue. The colour will always depend on the pen/paper combo of course, but have a look at the review to see if it matches the "powder" blue you're looking for... I have a bottle and if you'd like it, you're welcome to it. I've been using it mostly as "drops" to diffuse the green tinge on Noodler's various BB offerings. However, I've found that violets (like Iraqi Indigo) work better than adding light blue to remove the green tinge from those inks.

Others that you may want to consider:
- Diamine China Blue
- Herbin Bleu Azur (Azure Blue)
- R&K Blu Mare (Sea Bluish)
- R&K Blau Permanent (Permanent Blue)

Hijack hijack hijack ... sorry ...

Interesting points about the law, thanks to all! I think I'm a different breed from most law applicants -- I'm 42 years old; have 20 years of other careers behind me; attended an Ivy-caliber institution for my MA and for doctoral studies. I'm disappointed (hugely) in my LSAT score (haven't taken a standardized test in TWO DECADES!) but won't be able to improve that now (too late) so I'm not in the market for schools above, roughly, ranked 45 or 50-ish, depending on soft factors.

My take on it is: without further certs, my only option is to continue to borrow money annually from mom and dad, work two jobs, have a "salaried" position which offers less than $20K a year and yet requires me to dress like a rich man, attend events across the country by paying out of my own pocket for airfare and fancy schmancy hotels which my salary simply cannot cover, have to have a second job waiting tables in order to (A.) have enough money to afford to go to my first job and (B.) get free food so I don't have to pay for it so I can have enough money to afford to go to my first job; or ...

Or, I can get something -- an MBA? a JD? another MA? -- which will make me more marketable. Honestly, from my point of view, the "bi-modal distribution curve" of law salaries (I've seen that article, but thanks for bringing it up anyway) looks like two pieces of a wedding cake, one big and the other bigger. One bell of typical law salaries is, relative to my experience, obscenely high; while the other bell is just obscenely higher. Each is literally more than twice what I have ever made in my life. I wouldn't complain.

I guess it all comes down to expectations. I do hope to "do well" at law school, but I can't guarantee being in the top 5% of my class, regardless of the school I would attend. If by some bizarre stroke of luck I got into UNC or Duke or Northwestern or U Chicago, I'd be just as bright as most of the students, with just as much study skill, but probably a lot less chutzpah and energy, given my age. I just can't do all-nighters any more. And yet, alternatively, if I go to Cooley or Florida Coastal or Touro, I'm still only equally likely to be top or bottom of the class as I would be at an Ivy. Way back when, I was magna cum laude at a small liberal arts undergrad institution I viewed as good enough that I chose it over attending Harvard (I won't identify it for needs of internet anonymity; let's say it's in the league of Amherst Williams etc.), so maybe I'm good at schoolwork, but it's been two decades. Same thing for the LSAT.

I don't "really really want" to be a lawyer. I admit it! Rather, I really really want a "jump start" to my career. I can't go on being surrounded by the idle rich who don't need money, who then turn around and treat me as though I'm venal and money-grubbing for the mere fact of asking them to cover the bill at an expensive restaurant which I can't afford, to which they invited me, to which I had to attend for work required functions, and all the while they're making over $100K as "director of a non-profit" (read: major donor to the institution) and I'm making less than $20K as the Publicist (read: does the Director's work for him, they couldn't function without me, but I don't get paid squat). I'm the "typically impoverished humanities professional." I choose the exit strategy.

And yet I hate business. I took the GMAT, found it obscenely easy, could probably do quite well in MBA studies, and yet would not really want to spend any more time than necessary in Finance or Personnel. I really think I'm going to end up doing criminal law (prosecution!), or using my JD to "help make society a better place" without actually practicing law, by working in some field where I think it's a Good Thing To Do. So my dreams don't really include the big-law or litigation or corporate finance. I don't really understand Economics (do a search, you'll see that I'm posting on that very topic elsewhere at FPN) and, in fact, of all the straight-As that I got in undergrad, it was the one for which the information just ... didn't ... stick to me. It's full of falsehoods and lies. Humans are not acquisitive by nature. People tend to share when given the chance. We're all closet Marxists. Just look at how dad acted at the Thanksgiving table: "Little Billy doesn't get any turkey until after he shows me why I should give him some! He didn't paint the house, so I'm only offering him potatoes. Suzie got As and Bs in school, but since I personally can't exchange As and Bs for anything useful, grades not being a fungible commodity, I'm not giving Little Suzie any turkey either! I own the turkey, I keep the turkey until someone BUYS the turkey from me with something of value! Now, who wants to invest in turkey futures?" No, I don't think so.

I'm glad people have offered me some advice. I have really heard a lot of the similar line before, but I'm not exactly of the same status as most people who need to hear that advice. And yes I do agree, many kids go straight into a JD program without really considering whether it's right for them. Most are of the sort who got a humanities or politically oriented social science undergrad BA, don't know what they want to do with their life, and are looking about for greater status and pay than they'd get in some of the positions I've had to take throughout my non-starter of a career. I can't blame 'em. If I'd known that "we do it for the love, not the money" is just code for "Well, *I* get a lot of money, but I don't want *YOU* to get a lot of money," I would never have gone into a field which I thought I loved.

Further, my experience with what little law I've studied, has been totally invigorating. I *LOVED* preparing for the LSAT, and (my real score not withstanding) look forward to teaching it for a Test Prep company. There's reality and factuality to the decisions one makes, rather than just woofly-waffly "it seems to feel right" type of decision-making. I enjoy digging through Justice Marshall's decisions, I think more clearly and more "like a lawyer" than anyone I know -- most lawyer family friends included. It's 'tailor made' for the mind I was already born with. I'm disappointed in myself for not having found it sooner.

I do recognize the warnings many have given about the salary bubbles. Plenty of people think, "Oh, I'll do fine as a lawyer." Then they take debt and don't get an eventual salary that justifies that debt. Me, I'm seeing that equation already. I did the whole "go deeply into debt for no good reason as part of an academic program" thing once already. Medieval vernacular bibliography anyone?

Thanks again. Feel free to PM me further!

Now then, Carolina Blue ...

http://northcarolina.rivals.com/

Try (I think its PR) China Blue.

tom.

Hi. I also just saw one of Diamine's new inks. It is called China Blue. The first thing I thought of when I saw it was UNC.

Diamine makes China Blue, and it is sort of close. I agree with one of the above posters that finding the right pen color is the way to go, because all of this hasn't really yielded anything that works straight from the bottle.

BTW...State game is tonight, GO HEELS!

Go, Heels! Thanks, all, for your replies. Even the ones off topic were interesting.

Lisa