Cross, this justifiably "often-maligned maker"

[rhr]

Justin Rank asked on Pentrace, "If Cross is over 100 years old, then where are all the vintage pens?”. David Williams posted the following website with a chronology of Cross achievements.

 

http://www.cross.com/CompanyInformation/Pr...Product+History

 

And DocNib posted a defense of Cross, calling it "this venerable, but often-maligned maker". Well, I think Cross is justifiably "often maligned".

 

The problem is that the chronology in the website mentioned above doesn't answer the question that was asked. The question was where all those vintage Cross pens have gotten to. Well, there weren't that many in the first place as it turns out, at least not many that were successfully marketed.

 

All of Cross's early fountain pen patents were failures. In a time when Waterman was simplifying the fountain pen to 5 or 6 parts, Cross was producing overly complex and unworkable pens. The more parts you have, the more crevices there are for ink to creep into and dry up in, and to clog up the pen. Those early patents were probably never put into production. The only surviving examples of their pens are the Peerless fountain pens, the ones that mimic the style and simplicity of the Waterman's pens. Well, Cross was merely the agent for this pen, which was probably produced for them by another company during this early period of failures. Where are all those examples of the pen that was advertised with the slogan "Simplicity [is] Its Chief Feature"? I think that was the original question.

 

Take a look at the chronology again. The first entry is for the Cross stylo, which was merely a rip-off of MacKinnon's stylograph. It starts off with a "borrowing" of MacKinnon's idea, and then continues for 51 years with not a single mention of a fountain pen. All it gives from 1879 to 1930 are references to mechanical pencils.

 

"1879 Stylographic pen

1879 Propel-repel mechanical pencil

1881 Propel-repel mechanical pencil with clutch

1912 Propel-repel expel mechanical pencil

1930 Slim mechanical pencil with black bands design

1930 Fountain pen with black bands design"

 

That's 51 years of not very many fountain pen ideas, except for what they could beg, borrow, or steal from others.

 

George.

 

:ph34r:

Edited October 27, 2005 by rhr

[KCat]

very interesting - Cross has never really grabbed my attention except for when I was a kid and coveted a rosewood ballpoint and pencil set. which I still have. A gift from my mum when I turned 16.

[kjervin]

I take it that the original post is inferring that Cross should be maligned for it's liberal use of dates in it's history as opossed to be maligned for its product itself. As to the former, it is not at all unusual for a company to use the most favorable possible reading of history to justify an earlier "since" date. It's not as if the marketing people at Cross are a disinterested party doing pure historical research for the good of all mankind. They are trying to create a sense of longevity to enhance their company's image. I think is more telling that the Cross Pen and Pencil set was the default graduation gift for many american families for many years (at least in my circle of acquaintences) to the point that , at one time, I had about 7 of them (all chrome, by the way). It was also the default pen of the NC Highway Patrol (and many other states as well) for many years (not sure if it still is) because it was "guaranteed not to leak". My point is that they cartainly had/have a reputation for quality among the general public if less so among pendom (though my personal experience is that they make great pens - I have 7: a Verve, a Townsend, 3 centurys and 2 Solos; all of which write first time, everytime) and like most company histories, Cross's exists to further their marketing and sales departments efforts to enhance that reputation, whether deserved or not. Why else commision a book? While a historian may make the point that the more conservative dates should be used, there no reason why the company itself would do so to it's detriment, and expecting the company to not use the most advantageous reading of history possible is a little unrealistic., don't you think?

 

Kj

[rhr]

. . . the most favorable possible reading of history to. . .enhance their company's image [and] reputation. . .the most advantageous reading of history possible. . .

Hi Kj,

 

I don't know, maybe it's just silly me, or maybe it's a Canadian thing, but I expect people and even impersonal companies (though not governments), to at least tell the truth about themselves. I do not expect them to offer up "readings of history" that invite interpretations, and especially when those "readings" won't stand up to the scrutiny of a simple fact-checking test.

 

Maybe I expect too much.

 

George.

 

:ph34r:

Edited February 1, 2005 by rhr

[rhr]

. . . Alonzo stole MacKinnon's design wholesale but, to make it patentable, changed MacKinnon's spring-loaded needle valve to a weighted one. . . . In 1881 MacKinnon changed to a weighted needle precipitating a patent suit which the original infringer, Alonzo Cross, won.

Hi Rob,

 

You basically got the story right, but you reversed a few of the facts. MacKinnon's original Canadian patent in 1875, and UK patent in 1875, and then finally the US patent in 1876, called for a weighted needle-valve. Alonzo changed MacKinnon's weighted needle-valve to a spring-loaded one, not the other way round. The only thing Cross added to the design of the MacKinnon stylo was one spring. That's it. His so-called "patentable" idea consisted of a SPRING! Now, if Cross had owned the patent for the MacKinnon stylo, then the spring patent could be viewed as an evolution of and an improvement upon their own idea, but they didn't own the stylo patent. The Cross patent should never have been allowed.

 

At first it seemed the spring-loaded valve functioned better than the weighted valve, so MacKinnon briefly adopted this innovation in his stylos. That spring was the reason for the patent suit, not the weighted needle. But as it turned out, the spring was constantly submerged in the acidic ink of the day, and it very quickly corroded, even though it was made of silver or gold alloys, and it quickly lost it springy tension, so it didn't function very well after all. By 1880-81 MacKinnon reverted to the weighted needle valve, not only as a result of the patent suit, but also because of better function. That's why MacKinnon bothered to have his original patent reissued in 1879 without any substantial changes. Just look at all the drafting pens of our time, the direct descendents of the stylographic pens. Not one of them makes use of the spring idea. Every single modern drafting pen, to the last one, makes use of the weighted needle idea. MacKinnon's original idea was vindicated.

 

So who has the last laugh?

 

George.

 

:ph34r:

[Maja]

Well, I don't know about the "people with money but no taste" part, Rob---the Verve pen is quite elegant looking IMHO (I haven't seen one in person though...).

The only Cross pens I have are my gold-plated Cross ballpoint (and yes, it was a graduation gift ) and a lapis blue Cross Townsend ballpoint (which writes very well and balances nicely in my writing hand).

 

I remember a few months ago on Pentrace, someone asked about the Cross "Metropolis" fountain pen (which came out in 1995) and a few people said they were good writers with 14K nibs. I don't think they make them anymore, but I've thought about getting one. Anyone ever try one out?

[rhr]

Well, George, I watch DaVinci's Inquest so I can safely say that preferring lying, cheating, criminal sons-of-(bleep) is not foreign to the Canadian character.

Uh, Rob . . . DaVinci's Inquest is a fiction. But I know what you mean.

 

I watch DaVinci's Inquest, too, as well as the Canadian Cold Case, the first two CSI programs on television. I don't watch or read much fiction these days. If anything, I watch and read documentaries and non-fiction. Still, I would be more willing to take your comments seriously if you had mentioned such documentary television programs as The Fifth Estate, and W Five, and The Passionate Eye, all Canadian programs very much like such programs as Frontline, and Independent Lens, and Now, and 60 Minutes down south of the border.

 

Take care,

 

George.

 

:ph34r:

[Brian Anderson]

Barbara Lambert unequivocally states that Cross saved examples of its products, but chucked records in the 1960's and 1980's when offices were moved. Thus, a lot of her history of the company's products is either deduction or pure conjecture.

Interesting, I've been trying to determine if and when Cross manufactured mechanical pencils and ballpoints for Esterbrook. I emailed Cross, and was actually surprised when they emailed me back today saying, "After checking our records, we do not show any affilation between Cross and the Esterbrook Company." Now Come on....., I have and have seen examples that are identical to Cross metal pens. If Esterbrook sold something that similar and Cross DIDN'T make it, I'd be completely amazed there wasn't a lawsuit of some kind. No records between 1960 and 1980 certainly would explain this.

 

Is there any mention in the Lambert work regarding the relationship between Cross and Esterbrook? I suspect it was near the end of Esterbrook's lifetime, say mid to late 1960's.

 

Best-

Brian