Help identifying the artist on a Pilot Deluxe 1978 Maki-e

[PithyProlix]

18 hours ago, awa54 said:

 

 

Great writeup!

 

That's a feed/cartridge nipple design that I've not encountered before.

 

The leaky Deluxe that's still in my possession is a tan/brown laquer variant that seems to have a metal (brass?) section, rather than resin, so I had assumed the issue was linked to corrosion, I had also assumed that all of the Deluxe variants' sections would be metal, since the wall thickness would necessarily be very thin in this slim design.

 

I'll try to dig that pen up and disassemble it to see if the damage was caused by improper assembly, or erosion of the metal... I had not disassembled that pen before, as I didn't have a clear plan for repair and the coupler was not interested in threading out of the section at normal levels of force.

 

My mint (or possibly NOS) black Deluxe has been left unmolested, as it's in flawless condition both cosmetically and functionally.

 

 

UPDATE: So Many Bad Assumptions...

 

I found and have re-examined the "woodgrain" laquer Deluxe-ish pen:

first off, the section and connector ring remain stubbornly attached to each other... I used grip enhancers on both the connector and section and applied all the torque I could muster by hand, at some point I may step up to using tools, but it already felt perilously close to an amount of force that could break the section.

next, under high magnification, the section sleeve *appears* to be swirled resin/plastic as the cracks follow the divisions between tan and brown resin swirls. the color and pattern match with the barrel is so good that I had previously though it was also lacquer over brass.

 

as far as the exact model of my pen goes, it appears that it's actually a Deluxe variant, rather than a true Deluxe, as it's slimmer than the Deluxe, has a different cap interface ring and has slight differences in the length of cap and barrel, though OAL is the same. this pen is dated H577, while my standard black Deluxe is A1293. 

your urushi/art pen (of course) shares the same barrel tassie as my much newer Deluxe (although my newer pen has a 14k nib with round breather hole, as opposed to 18k and oval), it's my "almost-Deluxe" that has a different barrel tassie.

 

I would say that this bodes well for the single color Deluxe sections being proof against this issue, except that I'm *certain* that I've seen a thread (can't find it for citation  ), about section cracks in another black Deluxe on one of the pen forums I've frequented, plus I also own a Pilot TOW (looks like a Sheaffer Targa externally, but shares a nib design with the Pilot Volex, which in turn is quite similar to the Deluxe nib/feed/section design), which also has hairline cracks in its black resin section. In this case, the cracks in the black resin seem to have propagated from the metal collar at the front of the section though, rather than mid-section as seen in my Deluxe-ish pen... I honestly don't remember where the cracks were observed in the pen I saw discussed on that older forum thread, as it was at least three years ago now...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I saw your original post a few hours ago and I was thinking, isn't the section of a Deluxe normally resin? And isn't the base Deluxe just a resin cap/barrel pen? So I took some quick 'n dirty photos, then I came back to post them, and now I see your update. 😏 But I'm gonna post the photos anyway. 🙃

 

Sorry, I'm not gonna do surgery on the section or try to remove the coupler!

 

1976 Burgundy Deluxe, 1980 Black Deluxe, and 1984 Maki-e Deluxe. These 1976 & 1980 pens are not brass. Note the stepdown cap ring on the 1976 & 1980 - all three are snap caps. The flush cap of the 1984 has a similar angle of taper than the other two but, as you can see in the picture of the cap finials, since it starts with a smaller diameter at the bottom of the cap, it tapers down to a smaller finial. The barrel finials are similar to the corresponding cap finials for each pen and note that the 1976 is just a plated finial. Also note the section rings - the ones at the nib end - are all the same but different from yours. 1976 & 1980's section rings have lost most the plating (this is how they came to me).

 

I think it is interesting how similar my 1976 Deluxe is to my Montblanc 221P (last photo), a design that I believe came out in 1968. Does anyone know when the Deluxe was introduced?

 

We should probably start a new thread dedicated to the Deluxe and variants ...

 

 

 

 

[A Smug Dill]

On 4/5/2022 at 3:55 AM, awa54 said:

I'm still on the edge of my seat waiting to find out what part of this fairly intricate discussion was "unnecessary"

On 4/5/2022 at 6:08 PM, PithyProlix said:

I bet it was his own post that he wanted to delete, but could not because of forum software limitations ...

 

I'd say that's more a case of forum policy, that a participating member is not supposed (to have the power) to remove his/her voluntarily contributed content should it simply fail, or prove not conducive, to serving one's purposes for posting it for all to see in the first place. The forum software ‘limitations’ merely reflect that policy.

 

Anyway, what happened was that @mke had kindly offered his opinion/conclusion — which happened to be contrary to what I stated earlier in reply to the O.P. — about the identity of the maki-e artist, and presumably drawing on his knowledge and experience from living in Japan for the past three(?) decades. In spite of the disagreement, I really appreciated that he took the time and made the effort to splice together images to explain his reasoning, as well as consult with a colleague of his on the matter. She (according to @mke) disagreed with one part of his conclusion, but instead of simply questioning whether the other (main) conclusion — i.e. the identity of the artist — was also wrong and go back to the drawing board, ‘they’ then ventured a possibility such that it could still stand as valid.

 

That triggered my looking at it again more closely; and so his contribution was entirely ‘necessary’, for the intricate discussion to happen/continue. However, after I posted my second-round observations and conclusions, which are still in disagreement with his, instead of either digging his heels in and further arguing his case, or just admitting perhaps he was mistaken and/or his conclusion wasn't as sound as he originally thought, he went back and ‘deleted’/overwrote all his effort and contributions with a single word: ‘unnecessary’.

 

So, while I prefer to quote only selectively for context, in the case of @mke I will always quote entire posts in the future, and I'm also now following him on FPN to see what insights and opinions he has to share with others.

 

In a way, I suppose it's cool he found ‘a third way’, instead of either defending his position or admitting defeat… or even just waiting it out to see if Pilot responds to the O.P., to see whether he was right or wrong after all. On the other hand, I think it's completely against the spirit of open participation in a discussion forum; everything one says or writes is clearly for all to see, on record as it is, and not either in private conversation or with the caveat that, “only if it's right or makes me look good.” Being (proven) wrong sometimes is part and parcel of it; and, in this case, he hasn't been proven wrong at all, in that Pilot may yet come back to vindicate what he had originally written, and that it is me who was mistaken in my conclusions.

 

[awa54]

Thanks for the enlightenment and additional Deluxe info @A Smug Dill and @PithyProlix

 

I started a thread to tease out more pics and history on the Deluxe series, see you there!