19 Matching Annotations
  1. May 2025
    1. reply to u/highspeed_steel at https://reddit.com/r/typewriters/comments/1krspvh/im_totally_blind_and_new_to_typewriters_wax/

      Your question is a great one, but I'll go another direction since I'd dug into some of the history and details of Helen Keller's mid-century typewriters a while back. You can find some details and descriptions here (and in the associated links which includes an accessible video of Ms. Keller using a solid and sexy black Remington Noiseless standard typewriter): https://www.reddit.com/r/typewriters/comments/1ihot96/helen_kellers_typewriters/

      She managed on both her Remington as well as her brailler as well as any sighted person, though obviously had someone to check her printed work.

      I recently saw another heavily modified midcentury typewriter for someone who, if I recall correctly was not only blind, but had no arms. It was set up so that they could move a selector and type using a custom chin rest. Sadly, I didn't index it at the time, but it's interesting to know that such things existed for accessibility reasons.

      As for Braillers, you might appreciate this recent article about a repairman in Britain who was retiring: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jan/02/wed-be-stuck-alarm-as-uks-last-braille-typewriter-repairer-ponders-retirement

      I've got my own brailler, which is a sleek-looking art-deco industrial piece of art with the loveliest shade of dark shiny gray paint I've ever seen on a typewriter. (I'm both a mathematician and information theorist into the areas of coding and cryptography, so Morse code, Braille, etc. are professionally fascinating to me.) I still need to take it apart and repair a few portions to get it back to perfection, but it generally works well.

      As for the aesthetics, I personally enjoy the solid industrial look and feel of the machines from the 1930s-1960s. The early 30s and some 40s have glossy black enamel and machines like the Corona Standard/Silent from the 30s are low slung with flat tops that sort of resemble small pianos and just scream out "I'm a writer" with a flair for dark academia and just a hint of classical Roman design. Many of these machines come with gold tinged water-slide decals which really set themselves off against the black enamel, though on the majority of machines the gold is beginning to dim from time, wear, and uncareful application of cleaning solutions.

      I love the Royal KMM, KMG, and the Remington 17, Standard, and Super-Riter for their industrial chonkiness and (usually) their glass keytops. One of my favorites is the Henry Dreyfuss designed Royal Quiet De Luxe from 1948 which always gives me the feel of what it would look like if a typewriter wore a tuxedo or the 1948 gray and chrome model which is similar but has the feel of a sleek gray flannel suit on a 1950s advertising executive prone to wearing dapper hats, smoking cigarettes, and always with a cocktail in his hand. Into the 50s and 60s almost everyone had moved to plastic keytops which I don't think are as pretty as the older glass keytops with the polished metal rings around them.

      At the opposite end of that spectrum are the late 50s Royal FP and Futura 800s which have some colorful roundness which evokes the aesthetic of the coming space age. They remind me of the modern curves and star shapes of the television show The Jetsons. Similarly space-aged are the sexy curves of the silver metalic spray paint on wooden cases for the Olympia SM3 from the same period. These to me are quintessential typewriter industrial design. In gray, green, maroon, brown, and sometimes yellow crinkle paint with just a hint of sparkle in their keytops I really love the combination of roundedness and slight angularity these German designed machines provide. They have a definite understated sort of elegance most other typewriters just miss. I suspect that late-in-life Steve Jobs would have had an Olympia SM3.

      There's something comforting about the 40s and 50s sports-car vibe of the smaller Smith-Corona portables of the 5 series machines in the 1950s with their racing stripes on the hood. They feel like the sort of typewriter James Dean would have used as a student—just hip enough to be cool while still be solid and functional.

      Sadly into the 70s, while machines typically got a broader range of colors outside of the typical black, gray, and browns things became more plastic and angular. They also begin to loose some of the industrial mid-century aesthetic that earlier machines had. They often feel very 70s in an uncomplimentary way without the fun color combinations or whimsy that art and general design of of that period may have had in the music or fashion spaces. They make me think of politics and war rather than the burgeoning sexual revolution of the time period.

      Interestingly, for me, I feel like most typewriter design was often 10-20 years behind the general design aesthetic/zeitgeist for the particular decades in which they were made.

      Good luck in your search for the right typewriter(s) for your own collection.

  2. Mar 2025
  3. Feb 2025
    1. reply to u/HenRoRo61


      Earlier today, in a now-deleted post, someone had posted a question about identifying one of Helen Keller's typewriters based on this video in her archive.

      Having done some initial digging, I thought I'd share some of the details I've found for those who may find it interesting.

      According to researcher Richard Polt, Helen Keller was known to use both a Hammond and an L.C. Smith no. 5.

      As for the Remington Noiseless, it definitely appears to be a mid-century Noiseless Standard with a tabulator. To know the year, you'd need either the specific serial number (to cross check https://typewriterdatabase.com/remington.42.typewriter-serial-number-database) or you'd need many more examples than the Typewriter Database currently has listed under the generic Remington Noiseless.

      If you're careful at looking at the design choices and changes in some of the Remington Portables from that time period which would have likely tracked the design changes of their desktop standards, you might be able to extrapolate a closer dating based on the styling, but this will still only give you a dating within a year or so.

      The tabulator was at the top of the keyboard by 1937, so you can probably presume it was a model from that point or thereafter until 1954. Most American typewriter manufacturers didn't make machines from '41-45 due to WWII, so you can discard those dates. Remington had moved into thicker/taller plastic keys by the early 1950s, so I would guess her machine was more likely from the late 1940s.

      Looking more closely at the Remington Noiseless 10, I'd suggest that this is the most likely set of candidates, particularly in the timeframe of 1946-1947. Hers obviously had the openings in the rear and had the metal covers on the sides (as opposed to glass found on some models). Comparing hers in the film to some of these individual galleries may help to narrow things down with respect to dating.

      Perhaps others with more Remington Standard experience, may be able to narrow things down here.

      The appraisal of her Remington Noiseless in 1957 was $135.00.

      One might find some close noiseless models in the $20-40 range + shipping (these are about 30 pounds and will cost about $35 for shipping) via ShopGoodwill.com. Here are some recent sales for comparison. Based on the video you'll want the bigger, heavier ones (25+ pounds) rather than the smaller portables with cases (usually under 20 pounds). Generally machines purchased this way are reasonably functional, but usually need some cleaning and work to be restored to full functionality.

      Unless you're sure they're being sold by repair shops and have been cleaned and are fully functional, don't overspend on potential exemplars on sites like Etsy or eBay which are likely to be only marginally better (aka dusted off) than ShopGoodwill machines, but at 5-10x the price.

      Hellen Keller's brailler: https://www.afb.org/HelenKellerArchive?a=d&d=A-HK08-B049-183&e=-------en-20--1--txt--typewriter------3-7-6-5-3--------------0-1

      She apparently owned a \~1938 or 1939 Corona Silent as well: https://www.afb.org/HelenKellerArchive?a=d&d=A-HK08-B045-184.1.1&srpos=19&e=-------en-20--1--txt--typewriter------3-7-6-5-3--------------0-1

      One might have some luck trying to find a Corona Silent typewriter from that era, but the unique color is going to put a machine like it into the $100-200 range (at a minimum and potentially going up from there depending on the condition) unless you get lucky at a garage sale somewhere.

  4. Aug 2024
  5. May 2023
  6. Apr 2022
  7. Jun 2020
    1. Theoretical Yields When reactants are not present in stoichiometric quantities, the limiting reactant determines the maximum amount of product that can be formed from the reactants. The amount of product calculated in this way is the theoretical yield, the amount obtained if the reaction occurred perfectly and the purification method were 100% efficient. In reality, less product is always obtained than is theoretically possible because of mechanical losses (such as spilling), separation procedures that are not 100% efficient, competing reactions that form undesired products, and reactions that simply do not run to completion, resulting in a mixture of products and reactants; this last possibility is a common occurrence. Therefore, the actual yield, the measured mass of products obtained from a reaction, is almost always less than the theoretical yield (often much less). The percent yield of a reaction is the ratio of the actual yield to the theoretical yield, multiplied by 100 to give a percentage: percent yield=actual yield (g)theoretical yield(g)×100%(3.7.29)
    1. C7H16(l)+O2(g)→CO2(g)+H2O(g)(3.1.4)(3.1.4)C7H16(l)+O2(g)→CO2(g)+H2O(g) C_7H_{16} (l) + O_2 (g) \rightarrow CO_2 (g) + H_2O (g) \label{3.1.3} The complete combustion of any hydrocarbon with sufficient oxygen always yields carbon dioxide and water. Figure 3.1.23.1.2\PageIndex{2}: An Example of a Combustion Reaction. The wax in a candle is a high-molecular-mass hydrocarbon, which produces gaseous carbon dioxide and water vapor in a combustion reaction (see Equation 3.1.43.1.4\ref{3.1.3}). Equation 3.1.43.1.4\ref{3.1.3} is not balanced: the numbers of each type of atom on the reactant side of the equation (7 carbon atoms, 16 hydrogen atoms, and 2 oxygen atoms) is not the same as the numbers of each type of atom on the product side (1 carbon atom, 2 hydrogen atoms, and 3 oxygen atoms). Consequently, the coefficients of the reactants and products must be adjusted to give the same numbers of atoms of each type on both sides of the equation. Because the identities of the reactants and products are fixed, the equation cannot be balanced by changing the subscripts of the reactants or the products. To do so would change the chemical identity of the species being described, as illustrated in Figure 3.1.33.1.3\PageIndex{3}. Figure 3.1.33.1.3\PageIndex{3}: Balancing Equations. You cannot change subscripts in a chemical formula to balance a chemical equation; you can change only the coefficients. Changing subscripts changes the ratios of atoms in the molecule and the resulting chemical properties. For example, water (H2O) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) are chemically distinct substances. H2O2 decomposes to H2O and O2 gas when it comes in contact with the metal platinum, whereas no such reaction occurs between water and platinum. The simplest and most generally useful method for balancing chemical equations is “inspection,” better known as trial and error. The following is an efficient approach to balancing a chemical equation using this method.
  8. Mar 2019
  9. Dec 2016
  10. Jan 2016
    1. Getting and staying healthy involves tending to the people-oriented aspects of leading an organization, so it may sound “fluffy” to hard-nosed executives raised on managing by the numbers. But make no mistake: cultivating health is hard work. And it shouldn’t be confused with other people-related management concepts, such as employee satisfaction or employee engagement.

      I am looking forward to what these authors will provide as a recipe for cultivating health, and how they define organizational health.