Am I the only one who thinks the 51 doesnt really hold up aestheticly?

[jchch1950]

We, collectors and users of fountain pens can be happy about the wide range of pen designs, colours, sizes and nibs, and we can almost always find pens that we like to have and use.😉

[mana]

Parker "51" is, for sure, an iconic design, with more than a touch of modernity in its design DNA compared to the pens that were manufactured before it. It was groundbreaking when released, and has lasting power not just due to the aesthetics but also, the technical innovations it contains. It truly captured the "Form follows function" ethos at the heart of the Bauhaus.

Where it appears to fall short on the "modernity" scale of things is the use of the materials and manufacturing process which informed, and at places dictated, how the end result will look (from what I have understood, the manufacturing of the Parker "51" would be cost-prohibitive in this day and age).

Hence, the Lamy 2000, which was introduced a few decades later and is now a design well over half a century old, appears much more modern (a significant factor contributing to the previous is also the fact that no mass-manufacturing technology has yet superseded the ones used for the creation of the Lamy 2000).

Many people like to cart it around as an embodiment of the Bauhaus style, an opinion which I curtly retort with "Poppycock". It was not a pen meant for the masses (this can be seen from the initial pricing alone), its design most certainly doesn't adhere to the adage of "Form follows function" but rather, is very much informed by aesthetics alone (the continuous curve of the pen body which lead to ergonomics that do not suit everyone, the steel part of the section has dubious value and function, etc.). If you want Bauhaus from Lamy, the Safari and ABC are more suitable examples.

Engineering-wise it falls to a lineage of the earlier Lamy pens, namely, the 27 & 99, etc. which were, essentially, the same pen, but with just different materials and aesthetic/exterior design.

But, I digress... I still classify the Parker "51" as a modern design that greatly influenced the design of pens that came after it, not just at Parker but almost everywhere. Hooded nibs, streamlined pen bodies, the use of an internal collector/regulator as the feed, etc. were all thanks to the Parker "51". For example, there is the Aurora 88 which was designed in 1943 to be a direct competitor to the "51", then, most of the post-WWII Artus & the Lamy pens that followed, such as the 27 & 99, etc. There would be no Lamy 2000 without it.

[VacNut]

“Form follows Function”…those are fighting words, but that’s another discussion…Squirrel 🐿️🐿️🐿️🐿️

 

Mass production is certainly a major factor in pen manufacturing. I believe the 51 predates quality injection mounding. I am not aware of any other pen before the 51 that has an asymmetrical cross section, i.e the hood (although I understand the hood cross section is still a perfect circle along the length of the hood). One can discuss the practicality and aesthetics of the hood, but to develop a manufacturing process that can repeatedly produce such a component is innovative in design and production.

 

[Armo]

The Bauhaus connection...

https://parkersheaffer.com/parker-pen-designers/

https://www.penmuseum.co.uk/master 7.htm

[VacNut]

13 hours ago, Armo said:

The Bauhaus connection...

https://parkersheaffer.com/parker-pen-designers/

https://www.penmuseum.co.uk/master 7.htm

Thx.  
The provenance of the PS site was suspect in the past.

 

I believe the first 51s were rolled out around 1939. The article is speaking only about the MK II which was closely modeled after the original 51?

[Glenn-SC]

4 hours ago, VacNut said:

I believe the first 51s were rolled out around 1939.

I believe that the prototypes were test marketed in 1939 but the model was first released for sale in 1941.  

[FarmBoy]

I believe I believe. 

[Glenn-SC]

On 10/4/2023 at 11:39 PM, FarmBoy said:

I believe I believe. 

I was not there so I have no direct knowledge of the event and can only assume the data reported by others. 
Perhaps someone who was present can report more authoritatively. 

[FarmBoy]

It is generally accepted that the 51 hit the market in the US late in 1940.  There were certainly pens made as early as 1939 for market tests.  The production numbers given in one particular book are off by about a year.

[Estycollector]

"Development of the Parker “51” was completed in 1939, the 51st anniversary of the Parker Pen Company, thus its name. "

“51” History (parker51.com)

 

It is fortuitous that I found two from '42. Parker51 restored one. 

[es9]

Development completed does not necessarily equal “hit the market.”

[VacNut]

I would go with FB. The “Book” was written many years ago and new information has come to light.

Most manufactured items are made, stored, and shipped at once.

The year (+/-) is really inconsequential.

[VacNut]

At the risk of stirring a hornets nest:

“Form follows function”, the characteristics that make the 51 attractive to collectors really have nothing to do with the function. 
The end cap is needed to access the filler, but the tassie, stepping of the tassie, and jewel-like look of the end jewel are aesthetics. The pen needs a cap, but I would put the gold clip, the arrow shape of the clip, the vertical lines of the cap, the double lines around the cartouche, the jewel-like or aluminum clip jewel, and the asymmetrical hood in the same classification. All of these items were altered or deleted in later copies or models to the pen’s detriment.
“Form follows function” is only 50% at best. The other +50% is all about the aesthetics, and how the form enhances the function. IMHO 

[Estycollector]

The hood served to prevent the nib from drying out, prevent inky fingers, and easier filling. That the hood is attractive also tells me the Parker 51 was in line with the Bauhaus philosophy of form following function. 

 

I just checked and Parker was established in 1888, so 1939 would be the 51st anniversary. 

[VacNut]

4 hours ago, Estycollector said:

The hood served to prevent the nib from drying out, prevent inky fingers, and easier filling. That the hood is attractive also tells me the Parker 51 was in line with the Bauhaus philosophy of form following function. 

 

I just checked and Parker was established in 1888, so 1939 would be the 51st anniversary. 

Yes, the hood is functional, but it could have easily have been longitudinally symmetrical and not overhang the nib so much. The hood also didn’t need to be made in different colors.

Parker made many attempts at surrounding the nib. The final design was driven by aesthetics in my opinion.

 

The company had made transparent pens for 5 years prior to the 51, which showed ink capacity and set it apart from the other mfrs. Why move away from such a useful function?

I am guessing clear lucite hadn’t been perfected or it couldn’t be produced economically. It also seems the company was moving towards a more “streamline” look without all the different colors and patterns.

 

There are hooded Vacumatics in celluloid, but not production models.

[Glenn-SC]

I would like to see a production “51” with a date code of 1939 or 1940.  

[Estycollector]

I've always considered Parker used the streamline designs for all things of that era when considering the 51. 

 

[FarmBoy]

15 hours ago, Glenn-SC said:

I would like to see a production “51” with a date code of 1939 or 1940.  

You will not see one. The 1940 production pens have no date code. Just an imprint on the blind cap. 
 

Earlier pens and the test market pens are constructed differently under the hood. 
 

[mitto]

7 minutes ago, FarmBoy said:

You will not see one. The 1940 production pens have no date code. Just an imprint on the blind cap. 
 

Earlier pens and the test market pens are constructed differently under the hood. 
 

With a gold band on the barrel?

[Glenn-SC]

42 minutes ago, FarmBoy said:

You will not see one. The 1940 production pens have no date code. Just an imprint on the blind cap. 
 

What documents these as 1940 production?

Parker was dating pens well before 1940.  Why would these pens have no date code?