The Fp Pledge

[Eoghan2009]

There was a poem which resonates

 

"when I grow up and go to sea...

 

...and never call a ship a boat!"

 

I cannot find it for the life of me but a parody would be, "...and never call a bic a pen!"

 

Anyone know the poem?

[senzen]

I have for some time now been thinking of writing a "Fountain Pen Pledge" in which the virtues of fountain pens are extolled and the single use, plastic, disposable biro is denounced.

 

I would start by targetting banks that chain down their biros and suggest that they embrace the rejection of single use, plastic, disposable biros and put a lovely fountain pen on the end of their chain.

 

Still working on the pledge but I am sure there are others more skilled in initiating a campaign to restore fountain pens to their rightful place in society! So let me see what you can write!

 

I think we can go way beyond fountain pens vs biros: Recover your attention span. We could also think of all those electronics with short life spans ending as toxic waste.

[Parker51]

Philosophical question: what do you think of the works of art that are meant to be ephemeral? Sand sculptures by monks or umbrella installations by Christo, for example. The former is a natural material but the latter is not. A performance of a concert requires disposable resources and after the concert the music is gone. Just being a bit of a devil's advocate here.

 

All life is transitory. All experiances in high detail are ephemeral. The creation of and maintenance of physical objects has a cost per person experiencing those objects over a certain period of time just as a single performamce does. Thus, it is possible, reasonable and appropriate to compare them. And so, we must ask, what are the costs associated with all human expressions.

In regard to expressions which are designed to be shared by a limited number of people for a brief period, it is relatively easy to calculate the direct costs. Sometimes those costs per person experiencing the expression can be decreased through the use of recordings. Sometimes by the sharing of those experiances to others by word of mouth.

What gets difficult is measuring value.

As example, a large spectacle witnessed by a large number of people may have modest costs per person, but if the value per person is very low, then it may not be a worthwhile activity. A small expression that has significant cost, but has great value may be worthwhile. It all gets quite complicated.

I have used terms other than art, or performance on purpose. Many activities such as sport, both participant and spectator have value and should be included in discussions. Also, parks, public amusements, fairs, exhibitions, Pen Shows and a host of other activities valued by people need to be included. Really anything other than work, as architecture, both public and private typically involve significant costs and can be edifying and valuable to people as well as shopping, clothing, transport, etc.

What it comes down to in my mind is this question, if for the same, less, or perhaps only a little more human experiance can be better, shouldn't that be the determiner of decisions? Too often I believe we accept the status quo, or what others tell us and we don't examine the alternatives for our time, our resources, or our effort. We do not need to write with bad pens, those that are ugly, uncomfortable, produce a poor quality experiance and work product as writing instruments today are relatively cheap, even good ones.

Now back to your question regarding performances. I have been to many which I valued highly, but I have also been to many which I have not enjoyed particularly, nor learned much from. I can afford to go to more performances and plan on doing so, but I am careful as my time has value as well and I have learned that there is a real oppertunity cost associated with performances.

Edited December 18, 2019 by Parker51

[essayfaire]

All life is transitory. All experiances in high detail are ephemeral. The creation of and maintenance of physical objects has a cost per person experiencing those objects over a certain period of time just as a single performamce does.

 

What it comes down to in my mind is this question, if for the same, less, or perhaps only a little more human experiance can be better, shouldn't that be the determiner of decisions?

Agreed. Yet I don't think we can make the interpersonal comparison of what "better" is to someone else. I like my well-made, permanent, reusable objects. But I have never found a reusable water bottle that suits my needs as well as a disposable plastic one (for many reasons that ultimately don't relate to the fact that it is disposable). Someone else may feel it is important to live an untethered life and therefore may feel burdened by owning an object of lasting value versus one that can easily be abandoned.

 

Of course, I shun biros like the plague; that's why I'm on FPN.

[A Smug Dill]

I cannot find it for the life of me but a parody would be, "...and never call a bic a pen!"

 

What do you call a Platinum Rivere PTR-200 fountain pen (sold in Daiso stores for SGD 2.00/AUD 2.80) that has a reputation for not lasting very long with the plastic section developing cracks and consequently leaking ink onto the user's fingers? Earlier Platinum Preppy pens, and Nemosine demonstrators, that have a reputation for developing cracks in the cap or barrel over time? $1 Jinhao 992 pens?

[Karmachanic]

 

What do you call a Platinum Rivere PTR-200 fountain pen

 

Digby

Edited January 2, 2020 by Karmachanic

[Eoghan2009]

I must admit to preferring metal pens to plastic. It irks me that the P25 my go to pen uses plastic in the nib holder. That said I am not sure that a 100% metal nib is possible - am I wrong? Any time I have dismantled a pen for cleani ng the nib has very fine plastic "gills" (Biologist so closest analogy). These I assume are designed to hold ink and feed it presumably by capillery action. Not sure how metal would react in terms of surface interaction also prone to bend where plastic has a give but will return to shape (mostly).

 

Still think that a Forever Pen should be promoted and that disposable plastic pens should be a) taxed and the subject of pressure for their removal from public life.

 

Legislation is definitely the way to go drawing a parallel with electrical goods they should be graded according to longevity. Biros that would write on 2000 A4 sheets of paper should be graded 'A', biros that only last 1,500 'B,, 1000 'C' and so on.

 

Using an aggressive tax to target the most inefficient biros we could rig the free market to favour fountain pens. This mirrors plans in the US to outlaw side loading washing machines and plans to switch the UK to UHT milk, both these plans were designed to reduce our carbon footprint through restricting the choices offered to consumers.

[A Smug Dill]

... reduce our carbon footprint through restricting the choices offered to consumers.

That is something against which I'm prepare to fight, and as much as I'm not a "people person" and I don't even generally like people, I'm prepare to work with others or rally them to defend that little piece of the world as we know it -- consumer choice. People who are conservationist are welcome to make appropriate choices for their consumer spending and the satisfaction of their material wants, but everyone else ought to be free to drive the market through numbers (of prospective purchasers and in revenue dollars). We all live here, so we all have a hand in shaping the world to become closer to what we like.

[essayfaire]

That is something against which I'm prepare to fight, and as much as I'm not a "people person" and I don't even generally like people, I'm prepare to work with others or rally them to defend that little piece of the world as we know it -- consumer choice. People who are conservationist are welcome to make appropriate choices for their consumer spending and the satisfaction of their material wants, but everyone else ought to be free to drive the market through numbers (of prospective purchasers and in revenue dollars). We all live here, so we all have a hand in shaping the world to become closer to what we like.

+1

[wallylynn]

 

That is something against which I'm prepare to fight, and as much as I'm not a "people person" and I don't even generally like people, I'm prepare to work with others or rally them to defend that little piece of the world as we know it -- consumer choice. People who are conservationist are welcome to make appropriate choices for their consumer spending and the satisfaction of their material wants, but everyone else ought to be free to drive the market through numbers (of prospective purchasers and in revenue dollars). We all live here, so we all have a hand in shaping the world to become closer to what we like.

The problem I have with such a position is that it's also a false choice, a false equvalence. The effects are not one-to-one. Consumer choice is only a choice for consumers, not for non-consumers. Non-consumers have zero say in a market. Despite this limitation, the effects of other people's choices affect me. I subsidize those choices without recompense. Shaping the world requires action. Not buying is not an action, it is non-action. You buy a biro and added pollution to the world. I chose not to buy one. My so-called "choice" does not remove that pollution.

 

My stance is not about restricting choice. It is about for the item to have the FULL cost charged to the buyer. I want to be compensated for damages. Or better still, no damages in the first place. Unless that happens, the "market" is unfairly biased. I'm going to fight that bias.

Edited January 20, 2020 by wallylynn