This Just In: Waterman Charleston

February 11

Although I’ve been a user and fan of Waterman’s inks for years, I’ve never owned a Waterman pen.
Not wanting to start at the top of the range, nor get into a vintage pen that would require special handling, I elected for a more recent MIF model.

Here she is, an early 2000s Charleston in Black Resin with Palladium trim and an 18k M nib.

Once it’s cleaned and inked, I’ll put up a review.

February 12

I don’t own a single Waterman, but that is a classy looking pen!

February 12

I loooooove Waterman Pens! My first "real" enjoyable pen was a Phileas, followed by a Carene. I hear those Charlestons work beautifully too. I anxiously await your experience!

February 12

After 24 hours of soak and clean, rinse and repeat I finally have the pen presentable enough to show and use. (Why do people ink up a pen and then just leave it...and then sell it filthy?)

So after inking it up with (1950s era) South Seas Blue, I can happily report that this is a very enjoyable pen to write with.

Description is in the thread above, but quickly - The Charleston was manufactured from 2002 to 2008ish in Nantes, France on the Loire River in Brittany. It's a direct tribute to and draws its styling from the 1939 Waterman 100-Year Pen, with a fluted barrel and Art Deco 'ziggurat' engraving elements. It's about the same length and girth as a P51, right in the sweet spot for me.

This particular pen is presented in black resin with palladium trim, including an engraved jeweler's ring mid-barrel. The medium nib is also engraved and is palladium-plated 18k gold. It came with a Waterman's converter, box and papers. Overall, the pen exudes an understated elegance and quiet sophistication that you normally reserve for pens costing 2 or 3 times as much - and sometimes not even then.

Writing is buttery smooth with Waterman's ink, almost as if they were made for each other. ;-) In my Leuchtturm commonplace journal, it was an effortless experience to fill two pages with my impressions and scribbles.

Now for the quibble(s). There's only one.

The injection molding process can leave seams where the molds fit together. This is generally not a problem as the seams can be quickly buffed away. For some reason, Waterman elected to skip that step on this pen. This is not unique to mine, but is referenced across the 'net. Again, not a huge issue. I took care of it in less than a minute with a 12000 grit pad, but for full transparency I mention it here.

You will also see in other reviews that the Charleston's nib garners negative comments for being 'too small'. I understand this comment, but I don't agree with it. I think perhaps we've grown accustomed to large nibs as a part of the flash and bling of fountain pens - after all, they are pretty and fountain pens are no longer utilitarian but a luxury item. That said, increasing the size of this nib wouldn't improve it one jot, nor solve any perceived shortcomings. It writes beautifully and taken as a whole, I believe matches the pen's aesthetic very well.

Well, there you are. I'm rarely overly enthusiastic about a new pen. Perhaps it's because this is my first Waterman, being a Parker-head and having family at Sheaffer, but the Charleston really impressed me.

February 14

I have a yellow version of this pen that I bought new in the 2000s. Mine is an excellent writer as well.
However, I find the Charleston too small for daily use, it is both shorter and has a smaller grip diameter than a Parker “51”. I have an original 100 Tear Pen, and it is also longer than the Charleston.
While I don’t dispute or disparage the writing qualities of the Charleston, I agree with “the ‘net” that the nib looks too small. Perhaps an even smaller nib would have written just as well, but it would have looked even worse. IMHO Waterman made design choices that saved cost but lost customers.
The pen (functional) and nib (visual) sizes diminish my desire to use my Charleston.

April 16

I got one quite recently.

Material feeling is better than I expected, my unit doesn't have those seams from molding that other have, and weight and balance are quite nice. I like the design quite much, and I think it departs from most of other pens while looking classy but not outdated.

I have compared with a P51 and yes, diameter in the gripping section is less in the Charleston, specially if you grip the pen close to the nib. If you grip it higher, as I do, diameter is more or less the same. P51 is also longer.

Nib should be bigger. That's a big YES for me. To make things worse, the nib goes quite into the section, so it seems even shorter. With a bigger nib this pen would be really-really nice.