Represent The White Dot Something?

[Lazard 20]

A white dot is a white dot.

 

Sooner or later we will see a Sheaffer'S jewelry box from 1920 or earlier.

 

Now, about your post: A white dot is a white dot...and five colored rings are five colored rings, isn´t it?

 

http://s21.postimg.org/3nej6nx13/Bandera_olimpica_Lazard.jpg

 

No, right? These five colored rings represent something beyond what you see.

 

"...the six colors [including the flag's white background] thus combined reproduce the colors of all the nations, with no exception. The blue and yellow of Sweden, the blue and white of Greece, the tri- colors of France, England and America, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Hungary, the yellow and red of Spain next to the novelties of Brazil or Australia, with old Japan and new China. Here is truly an international symbol." In adittion the fact that the rings are interlaced could speak to us about friendship among nations

 

In the creative process of Men is rare to find an image that is not the result of an idea and I do not think the WD is an exception.

 

(Taking the example of Daniel, "Duofold" is not only the word, or sound, "Duofold" but the representation of an idea -a fountain pen DuoColor and Manifold, perhaps- product of a thinking mind)

 

A white dot is a simple white dot? For Sheaffer´S, in their concrete case, not, let see:

 

Arrows -in SheafferS catalog, in SheafferS barrels and in SheafferS ads directed towards to WD- , bull´s eyes -graphically and with words in Sheaffer´s catalog and into Mr. Nishimura description-, white dots -as bull´s eye in ads- and Sheaffer´S fountain pens -as arrows directed towards to WD- are there, related to each other. There is a relationship, someone can today doubt whether it is causal or not, but the relationship is undeniable.

 

This one.

 

http://s14.postimg.org/rv5oz7ei9/white_dot_arrows_bull_s_eye_lazard.jpg

or this one even more evident

http://s22.postimg.org/tnvx6qpbl/white_dot_arrows_bull_s_eye_lazard.jpg

 

In black and white, in Sheaffer´S catalog, and barrel... and in the top cap of a Sheaffer´S fountain pen.

 

http://s9.postimg.org/pbr5cvhpr/white_dot.jpg

Edited January 16, 2015 by Lazard 20

[Roger W.]

Lazard;

 

Thank you for pointing out Sheaffer's sporadic use of bullseye imagery. That it relates to what the white dots stands for is a pure flight of fantasy which lacks any coherent obvious plan by Sheaffer that bullseye relates to it in the least. Veley's observation that it was lifted from a British firm makes much more sense and the relative timing more supportable. We have loads of ads and catalogs over the wide period from "bullseye of perfection" (1912) through the introduction of the white dot (1924) and bullseyes feature so little in that that reasonable support for your position ultimately fails. You have four pieces of data. The arrow on the original imprint (1912) original catalog (1912) Arrow ad (October 1927 and after the introduction of the white dot) Pens pointing to dot (real stretch here, November 1927 and after the introduction of the white dot). So we have to throw out the last two as not relevant. That gives you two items from 1912 that you say influenced the white dot of 1924. Can't you see that there isn't the least coherent thread of development? I honestly think you are so taken by your own novel idea that you can't admit the truth. The Bullseye of perfection does not equate, in any constructive way, the introduction of the white dot!

 

Roger W.

[Lazard 20]

Lazard;

 

Thank you for pointing out Sheaffer's sporadic use of bullseye imagery. That it relates to what the white dots stands for is a pure flight of fantasy which lacks any coherent obvious plan by Sheaffer that bullseye relates to it in the least. Veley's observation that it was lifted from a British firm makes much more sense and the relative timing more supportable. We have loads of ads and catalogs over the wide period from "bullseye of perfection" (1912) through the introduction of the white dot (1924) and bullseyes feature so little in that that reasonable support for your position ultimately fails. You have four pieces of data. The arrow on the original imprint (1912) original catalog (1912) Arrow ad (October 1927 and after the introduction of the white dot) Pens pointing to dot (real stretch here, November 1927 and after the introduction of the white dot). So we have to throw out the last two as not relevant. That gives you two items from 1912 that you say influenced the white dot of 1924. Can't you see that there isn't the least coherent thread of development? I honestly think you are so taken by your own novel idea that you can't admit the truth. The Bullseye of perfection does not equate, in any constructive way, the introduction of the white dot!

 

Roger W.

 

I appreciate your contribution to this post but, in effect, I cannot accept your truth, not the Truht but your truth.

 

You have omitted intentionally Mr. Nishimura description of Sheaffer´S jewelry box or you have forgotten this? (By the way, as you hidden on other web sites that there ads in Spanish, Portuguese and Brazilian with Tuckaway as vest pocket. Do you are recidivist hiding arguments against your truth?)

 

You don´t know, or worse you have omitted willfully, that drawings in the ads with arrows and WD with bull´s eye sense that you consider "no relevant" were executed by Donald Denton, illustrator who was hired for Sheaffer'S in 1924?

 

Do you really know what you're talking about? If anyone knew what he was drawing this was undoubtedly Donald.

 

Did you know that Donald Denton in 1924 illustrated the latest ad without WD and the first with WD?

 

Donald Denton was there during the onset of White Dot... and in the next marketing campaigns he drew arrows and fountain pen targeting a bull's-eye (no pipes, by the way).

 

I summarize, Donald Denton drew the first ad with WD, afther that he drew WD as bull´eye and Craig Sheaffer authorized this marketing campaigns, the Board of Directors approved this campaigns with a cost of tens of thousands of dollars and finally Sheaffer´S paid this dollars for flooding U.S. and all Universities with sense WD as bull´s eye.

 

For Roger it isn´t relevant. Well, no problem, let see now the "no relevant" Sheaffer´S jewelry box.

Edited January 16, 2015 by Lazard 20

[Roger W.]

Lazard;

 

Donald Denton was not there in 1912 when the whole bullseye of perfection was discussed so that his being there in 1924 and three years later drawing one pretty advert of arrows is not relevant (and one other ad showing pens pointing to the dot which may or may not indicate a target). If it were relevant bullseyes would be all over the place in 1924 and they aren't seen until 1927! Sheaffer headquarters has nice green tiles with white dots in the center and not a bullseye anywhere to be seen. We haven't seen David's box and it would be a one off. There just isn't enough evidence to support your contention. You tend to compress years into single events which just wrong.

 

For Lazard unrelated events are evidence. Well no problem. Also, no reality.

 

Roger W.

[Roger W.]

Lazard;

 

Look how Jon Veley crafted his argument. The dates are close and there is a close alignment with the operations of Dunhill and Sheaffer. It's a pretty tight relationship. Your arguments have failed to convince because you have not been able to draw that tight (or even a reasonable) relationship of events to support a bullseye argument.

 

Roger W.

[Lazard 20]

Lazard;

 

Donald Denton was not there in 1912 when the whole bullseye of perfection was discussed so that his being there in 1924 and three years later drawing one pretty advert of arrows is not relevant (and one other ad showing pens pointing to the dot which may or may not indicate a target). If it were relevant bullseyes would be all over the place in 1924 and they aren't seen until 1927! Sheaffer headquarters has nice green tiles with white dots in the center and not a bullseye anywhere to be seen. We haven't seen David's box and it would be a one off. There just isn't enough evidence to support your contention. You tend to compress years into single events which just wrong.

 

For Lazard unrelated events are evidence. Well no problem. Also, no reality.

 

Roger W.

 

Look how Jon Veley crafted his argument. The dates are close and there is a close alignment with the operations of Dunhill and Sheaffer. Wrong. Perhaps lacked Sheaffer´s historic information to Jon Veley. Bull´s eye in catalog, feather in barrel and Sheaffer´S jewelry box is predated to Dunhill Spot. I am inclined to think that reached from different paths nearby places or, less likely, Dunhill without prior evidence about bull´s eye of perfection, unless mistake for my part, could have copied to Sheaffer´S. But it is curious that you dont see simple indications in arrows ads drawn by Denton, nor ads of fountain pen as arrow to a bull´s eye nor first Sheaffer´S catalog with the same fpen pointing to a white dot center of bull´s eye nor Mr. Nishimura description, nor presentation of WD to Board of Directors, nor the two concentric circles, no one, I speak from my memory, that surround the logo in the hall tiles, and you see not mere indication, but evidence, in a spot in a pipe very post to Sheaffer´S bull's eye of perfection and post to Sheaffer'S jewelry box.

 

Donald Denton was not there in 1912, Oh yes!.. but an commercial illustrator is obliged to study what was illustrated before his own arrival and to inquire for to study about the essence of the company for transfer it to paper. If he asked Mr. Walter or near, what do you think they said? Could they talk about pipes or about bull´s eye of perfection?

 

One pretty ad. Not, several pretty ads with arrows pointing to WD and others with fountain pen as arrows pointing too to WD and hundred of thousand dollars paid for it diffusion .

 

Sheaffer headquarters has nice green tiles with white dots in the center and not a bullseye anywhere to be seen... for you, but is possible, only possible, that others are more able to view sense into a logo or have more specific knowledge about graphic history of a company .

 

1924 and they aren't seen until 1927! This misses you, but possible evolution of WD as a graphics from 1912, as you say, to standing at the headquarters floor decades later isn´t strange for you.

 

We haven't seen David's box and it would be a one off... or as in as a touchdown and, I say to you, that predate to Dunhill spot. We're going to laugh! You'll see!

 

There just isn't enough evidence to support your contention. False or wrong. I assert nothing in this topic, in fact I speak in conditional, see: "-That if, and only if, that idea origin in Catalog was real , the White Dot could be a dartboard as extracted image represents everything logo." or "Serve this so that anyone else who may be interested in these respects deepened in this or another line".

 

Only you are who claims to be in possession of the truth ... I'm still looking for.

 

 

Footnote. I acknowledge and regret the investigation effort but Dunhill´s spot theory is dying, or dead, because having Sheaffer´S the white center of the bull's-eye of perfection in their first catalog, in their foundational catalog nothing less! and 10 years before Dunhill, the best graphic illustrators to their service and Marketing Dept. - even without citing now the Sheaffer´S jewelry boxes-, why Sheaffer's have to resort to an alien, strange and copied white center?

 

In addition thereto Sheaffer'S did not need copy anything to Dunhill in 1924 because they have just it reference from 1912 or 1913, so when already appears WD on Sheaffer´S fountain pens, if this means a simple white dot, could be placed along the barrel or along the cap, but does so precisely on top of the cap drawing thus a profile with a lighter and little circle into a darker and larger circle... as the bull's-eye of perfection of their foundational catalog (or on jewelry boxes -the description of Mr. Nishimura is clear as water-). What coincidence, man!

 

Could Sheaffer´S White Dot represent or symbolize a bull's-eye of perfection of fountain pens manufacture as Walter Sheaffer proclaims in the cover of his foundational catalog?

 

http://s11.postimg.org/g4lxafrg3/white_dot_vs_bull_s_eye_lazard.jpg

Edited January 17, 2015 by Lazard 20

[FarmBoy]

I find it very useful to post have the source and date of any reproduced ads when I am trying to sort out for myself any historical significance to the arguments presented by someone

 

 

For example, each advertizement should be accompanied by 'from Life Magazine December 11, 1921; back cover"

 

Edited to add:

 

A wonderful example of providing attributes to reproduced materials can be found on a blog post by J. Veley on this subject.

Edited January 17, 2015 by FarmBoy

[Lazard 20]

I find it very useful to post have the source and date of any reproduced ads when I am trying to sort out for myself any historical significance to the arguments presented by someone

 

For example, each advertizement should be accompanied by 'from Life Magazine December 11, 1921; back cover"

 

Great advice, thanks, I will try to respect from now.

 

This is the cover of first Sheaffer´S catalog. Circa 1913 (1912 if we attend to Mr. Wooten words. His exact words are:

 

"from "bullseye of perfection" (1912).

 

http://s14.postimg.org/3srxxez9d/image.jpg

 

In adittion thereto, we have Mr Nishimura description who relates White Dot with Bullseye: "I found a small ring box (plush, squarish, hinged) from Sheaffer's jewelry store, and there was a sort of bullseye logo in the lining of the top that looked just like a white dot in a circle"

 

And if we follow Mr. Kirchheimer words: Sheaffer's jewelry store remained in business under that name at least through 1921.

 

Where is verified that the catalog and, probably, the jewelry box, are predate to Dunhill ad in the blog that you indicate and that both would be Sheaffer iconography so, no only Dunhill ad predates but unrelated to any other company too.

 

In any case, regardless of the jewelry box, Sheaffer'S had their own internal foundations from their establishment in 1913 to adopt a center of a bull´s eye -of perfection- as a symbol or logo by having the image and the phrase that develops the sense of this image into company philosophy as shows in their foundational catalog (regardless of what others companies can make after 1913).

Edited January 18, 2015 by Lazard 20

[Roger W.]

Lazard;

 

Look, if the bullseye of perfection were related to the white dot they would have put the white dots on the first pens then it would all make sense. You've not refuted Veley in the least as your argument is sad and pathetic and his is robust and supported by facts that really interrelate. No bullseye ads in 1924 with only one in 1927 and a sorta one in 1927. The '24 listing for the white dot as a trademark is not marked as bullseye or target in any way. Did the attorneys miss this vital fact? Was Sheaffer being sneaky? Stay tuned for Lazards bizarre answer to these simple questions!

 

Roger W.

[abw9259]

I like to think the white dot represents a pearl of great price. A symbol of both natural perfection and luxury in a time before cultured pearls. Just as a tiny grain of sand after many years if not decades can lead to a build up of nacre and spherical perfection produce the most expensive of organic gems so could Sheaffer's after years of research and design produce the most sought after pen guaranteed for life!

 

Now shove that in your vest pocket or side pocket as the case may be depending on your sartorial preferences and summer wear and think about it!

[Lazard 20]

Lazard;

 

Look, if the bullseye of perfection were related to the white dot they would have put the white dots on the first pens then it would all make sense (1). You've not refuted Veley in the least as your argument is sad and pathetic and his is robust and supported by facts that really interrelate (2). No bullseye ads in 1924 with only one in 1927 and a sorta one in 1927 (3) . The '24 listing for the white dot as a trademark is not marked as bullseye or target in any way . Did the attorneys miss this vital fact? (4)

 

Roger W.

 

1. When WD appears this haven´t no great importance (is not Parker Blue Diamond case): I would remind you that S´S Lifetime guarantee already existed and this WD appearance is simultaneous with new fpen colors and new materials so that advertisers focused on what really important for audience, Lifetime guarantee, bright new colors and light materials.

 

2. If you are interested, please, see corresponding topic.

 

3. Wrong. Look down. During 1925-1928, 4 years! there are plenty of differents ads with WD as bull's-eye of arrow-fpens... as 1913.

 

4. Wrong newly. Let see: the trademark "Free" very generic as you can appreciate, in the heading of clothing brand, is mine and "Free ecological cotton" too, well, generic descriptions is much more valuable and difficult to obtain than others more concrete. Personally I´ve designed logos -I´m Graduate in Arts(*) among other things- and commercial names. Personally, without intermediaries nor layers, with my own hands, I have registered logo and names in OEPM (trademark Office).

 

I can tell you that typically you must register the broadest sense that allow registration officer. S´S lawyers did their job very well because they covered "all the white dots" without limitations of white dot origin.

 

(*) I hope you do not ask me the link to my artworks website. You'll have to settle with 3 different avatars -originals in acrylic painting 92 x 92 cms-. I've used here, in FPN.

 

 

I find it very useful to post have the source and date of any reproduced ads when I am trying to sort out for myself any historical significance to the arguments presented by someone. FarmBoy.

 

Great advice, thanks, I will try to respect from now. Lazard.

 

Promise is debt.

 

 

http://s28.postimg.org/w4qg1za65/white_dot_bull_s_eye_lazard.jpg

 

Sheaffer'S had the image and the sentence that gives meaning to the image as live motive, "Bull´s eye of perfection" from their establishment in 1913. From their foundation.

 

4 years to dispel doubts. During the first 4 years, nothing less! from WD appearance on top cap, ie from 1925 to 1928, there are differents ads campaigns, with many different drawings, based on images with WD as bull's-eye of arrow-fpens... the same image and sense that 1913 foundational catalog. What a coincidence, man!

Edited January 18, 2015 by Lazard 20

[Lazard 20]

Walter Sheaffer, his son, his son in law, including the good man Mr. Brewster, they saw the same what many others -with some exceptions - see today.

 

 

A WHITE CIRCLE INSIDE A GREATER AND MORE DARK CIRCLE ... AS THEIR 1913 BULL'EYE.

http://s22.postimg.org/byvzvip1t/white_dot_bull_s_eye_1930_lazard.jpg

Now, all together, so Daniel, Roger, Freddy, Shaporama, Jonszanto, Kernando, BeRa and abw9259 can see more clearly while they waiting to see the S ´S jewelry case.

 

http://s8.postimg.org/rdtlv42lh/white_dot_bull_s_eye_2_lazard.jpg

http://s7.postimg.org/dtqmkatzv/sheaffer_pens_arrow_bulls_eye_Lazard.jpg

Edited January 19, 2015 by Lazard 20

[H1N]

7 million of SheafferS web pages !!?

[kirchh]

A WHITE CIRCLE INSIDE A GREATER AND MORE DARK CIRCLE ... AS THEIR 1913 BULL'EYE.

 

No.

 

The White Dot trademark was not for a white circle inside a greater and more dark circle. it's just for the white circular figure:

 

http://home.comcast.net/~kirchh/Misc/Logo_description_detail.jpg

 

And here is the specimen that Sheaffer submitted with their trademark registration:

 

http://home.comcast.net/~kirchh/Misc/Specimen_detail.jpg

 

Now, if Sheaffer intended their important new logo to look like a target, and to be perceived as being a target, why wouldn't they include at least one ring around the white dot in their trademark? And who could possibly look at the specimen they chose and submitted, with a marbled jade field behind the dot, and identify it as a target?

 

Really.

 

--Daniel

[kirchh]

A WHITE CIRCLE INSIDE A GREATER AND MORE DARK CIRCLE ... AS THEIR 1913 BULL'EYE.

 

Might want to get that monitor calibrated...

 

http://home.comcast.net/~kirchh/Misc/Black_Bullseye_Detail.jpg

 

--Daniel

[Lazard 20]

Lazard 20, on 19 Jan 2015 - 16:38, said:

A WHITE CIRCLE INSIDE A GREATER AND MORE DARK CIRCLE ... AS THEIR 1913 BULL'EYE.

 

Might want to get that monitor calibrated...

 

http://home.comcast.net/~kirchh/Misc/Black_Bullseye_Detail.jpg

 

 

A WHITE CIRCLE INSIDE A GREATER AND MORE DARK CIRCLE ... AS THEIR, AS SHEAFFER´S 1913 BULL'EYE.

 

Precisely the existence of other colors bull's eye confirms that, using this particular Sheaffer'sa white, what makes THEIR bull's-eye target of 1913.

[kirchh]

Lazard 20, on 19 Jan 2015 - 16:38, said:

 

Might want to get that monitor calibrated...

 

http://home.comcast.net/~kirchh/Misc/Black_Bullseye_Detail.jpg

 

 

A WHITE CIRCLE INSIDE A GREATER AND MORE DARK CIRCLE ... AS THEIR, AS SHEAFFER´S 1913 BULL'EYE.

 

Precisely the existence of other colors bull's eye confirms that, using this particular Sheaffer'sa white, what makes THEIR bull's-eye target of 1913.

I don't understand what you mean. You said Sheaffer's bull's eye was shown as a white circle inside s darker circle. I showed a detail from a color ad from the period that has the target as a dark circle inside a greater and lighter circle.

 

--Daniel

Edited January 20, 2015 by kirchh

[Lazard 20]

 

 

 

No.

 

The White Dot trademark was not for a white circle inside a greater and more dark circle. it's just for the white circular figure:

 

http://home.comcast.net/~kirchh/Misc/Logo_description_detail.jpg

 

And here is the specimen that Sheaffer submitted with their trademark registration:

 

http://home.comcast.net/~kirchh/Misc/Specimen_detail.jpg

 

--Daniel

 

A WHITE CIRCLE, BUT INSIDE A GREATER AND MORE DARK CIRCLE ... AS THEIR, AS SHEAFFER´S, 1913 BULL'EYE...

 

AS SHEAFFER´S JEWELRY CASES, AS SHEAFFER´S LETTHERHEADS, AS SHEAFFER´S TOP CAPS, AS ADS.

 

Edited January 20, 2015 by Lazard 20

[kirchh]

A WHITE CIRCLE, BUT INSIDE A GREATER AND MORE DARK CIRCLE ... AS THEIR, AS SHEAFFER´S, 1913 BULL'EYE.

You missed the image I posted for, what, the seventh time? When shown in color, the target's center circle is dark, and the ring around it is lighter.

 

By the way, your Caps Lock key is stuck.

 

--Daniel

[Lazard 20]

It essentially makes it impossible to follow anything he says...

 

 

I find it impossible to follow what he says regardless.

 

But if it is very easy!!

 

I say (Lazard say) that, based on the original idea of foundational Sheaffer´s 1913 catalog and its leitmotiv "Bull's eye of Perfection" contained therein, fountain pens as arrow rigth to bullseye, the arrow in the first imprint in barrel, Mr. Nishimura description of jewelry case, WD into a larger and darker circle, diferents drawings in ads During 4 years with arrows and fpens thrown to WD as if this were a bulleye:

 

-That if, and only if, this idea was originally real, Mr. Sheaffer, who remained in the sales psychology from 1905 until at least 1939, MAY WELL keep this idea less time, from 1913 to 1924.

 

-That if, and only if, that idea origin in Catalog was real, White Dot COULD BE a dartboard as extracted image represents everything logo.

 

who deny this claim, with all right for them, say:

 

-That if, and only if, this idea was originally real, Mr. Sheaffer, who remained in the sales psychology from 1905 until at least 1939, HE DON´T MAY well keep this idea less time, from 1913 to 1924.

 

-That if, and only if, that idea origin in Catalog was real, White Dot CAN´T BE a dartboard as extracted image represents everything logo.

 

And Jon Veley say that WD is surely a copy of a pipe spot.

 

That´s all folks. This topic is simple and easy to understand!

 

End of this section, now I begin to answer some other marginal issues to the topic.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------- o0o --------------------------------------------------------

 

 

By the way, your Caps Lock key is stuck. said Daniel ironically.

 

Oh no! Really I´ve written in capital in your favor! I thought you could not see well because you come back with the same issues, like Walter Sheaffer saw, o not, their letterheads. If he signed, he saw what he was signing, that is not debatable. Or you come back by seventh time with a bull´s eye alien to topic, alien to Sheaffer´S and that is not debatable matter here, if you dont see it, I'll write in capital letters... and underlined,

 

Well, now you're simply making things up. You have no idea what Walter Sheaffer, W. A. Sheaffer II, or anyone else from the time saw. Please don't fabricate information like this; it only distracts from the discussion, Daniel sentenced.

 

My assertion is obvious since Walter Sheaffer, when he signed a letter, he saw the letterheads where was A WHITE CIRCLE, BUT PRECISELLY INSIDE A GREATER AND MORE DARK CIRCLE ( ... AS THEIR SHEAFFER´S 1913 BULL'EYE OR AS SHEAFFER´S REGISTER, BY THE WAY)...

 

"My" bull's eye is Sheaffer's. And it has a dark center and a lighter outer ring. (1)

 

I don't understand what you mean. You said Shesffer's bull's eye was shown as a white circle inside s darker circle. I showed a detail from a color ad from the period that has the target as a dark circle inside a greater and lighter circle. (2)

--Daniel

 

(1) Shows, as I do, complete photo, origin and date and when I joined to this topic we´ll talk. For the time being we have one more bullseye into Sheaffer'S iconography. I will be happy to incorporate this Sheaffer´S bullseye to my large collection.

 

(2) In this matter you are dispersed, alien to the topic. Yes you have showed a detall color about an ad NON-SHEAFFER´S -while do not show otherwise- and I have showed detall of SHEAFFER´S ads, trademark register -thanks, Daniel-, arrow in barrel, Sheaffer´s jewelry case design, Sheaffer´S 1913 catalog, arrows in ads and so on.

 

So, when you show full photo of this bullseye, we can say; THERE ARE MANY BULL´S EYES AND MANY OF THEM ARE SHEAFFER´S, FOR SOMETHING WILL !!

 

Well, the current direct descendant of Dunhill's pipe business says 1912..

 

--Daniel

 

Thanks newly, It want to say that Walter Sheaffer in 1913, afther 1912 isn´t it?, being able to copy a pipe without slogan, chose a bull's-eye into a target, with a fountain pen addressing to bull's-eye and the slogan Bull's-eye for perfection.

 

If there was Dunhill spot in 1912, I think Sheaffer'S not fixed in it. There are no relation between a simple "mute spot", meaningless, in a pipe and Sheaffer´S posterior fountain pen right to a bull´s eye and, additionally, next to philosophical leitmotiv...but as I always say on this topic, everything can be.

 

Oh, no! wait, Jon Veley say that not. He think that is 2 years posterior to Sheaffer´S foundational idea.

 

Yeah, I wondered about that ... "about" 1912, actually. With other sources saying 1915, I wondered (trying not to get to carried away with the theory) whether Dunhill was rounding back a couple of years for some reason . . .

 

 

Now, please, let me, of moment -comic created by The Walters, colored and reinterpreted by me- I leave this topic with a smile while I am going to study the standpoint of Jonveley based in that Sheaffer´S copied to Dunhill, who says, after a thorough study and preamble:

 

"...the white spot already meant quality and signified a guarantee, thanks to Dunhill. Sheaffer merely repurposed an existing mark for use on its writing instruments, as surely as if the company had adopted a three-spoked wheel." Jon Veley, FPN user.

 

Where did cartoonist took the idea, of a pipe perhaps?

http://s13.postimg.org/d371iurhj/white_dot_arrows_bull_s_eye_Hairbrush_color_La.jpg

Edited January 21, 2015 by Lazard 20