Everything is a Remix by [[Kirby Ferguson]]

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLU1WuLg45SiyrXahjvFahDuA060P487pV

Brother AX-350 by [[Sam Christy]]

The Texting Typewriter (hardware) by [[Sam Christy]]

https://hackaday.com/2024/12/18/back-to-the-future-of-texting-sms-on-a-panasonic-typewriter/

https://www.amazon.com/Good-Girls-Guide-Murder/dp/1984896369

Typewriter Market: It may be better if you didn't get an Olympia SM3 typewriter today.

I'm not out to shame people for their purchases, just to caution uninitiated typewriter purchasers and budding collectors who aren't carefully watching the market.

Olympia SM3s are well-touted and excellent typewriters. They've recently been selling on ShopGoodwill in unknown condition for $120-150 based only on photos.

Earlier today, an Olympia SM3 sold for $334! So what gives? Why did this go for over twice as much as the average? To the uninitiated, the seasoned collector can look at this machine carefully and realize that even without seeing a type sample or a close up photo of the slugs that this machine is quietly hiding a script typeface of some kind. This means that two bidders would have paid an almost $200 premium for a script typeface, and one of them managed to snipe it for $1 with minutes left. Generally I see script machines going for $100-150 over similar machines without script.

Sadly, the high price on this machine earlier in the day may have suckered others into thinking these machines are significantly more valuable as it seems two other Olympia SM3s right after it both went for:<br /> * $202.03 https://shopgoodwill.com/item/222707079 * $202.03 https://shopgoodwill.com/item/222546519

And they were bid over 200 by the same two people while the "smarter" money stopped with bids at $137 on both.

Of course, neither of these later two machines have a script face, but at least two bidders were potentially reeled in by the much higher sales price of the script machine earlier in the day. This means that they've overpayed at least $50 above market for each, possibly thinking that they may have gotten a great deal. Sadly they didn't, they just overpayed the market average. The person who was sniped on both managed to save themselves $100+ today because I imagine they'll be able to get equivalent machines in the coming month for closer to under $150.

Incidentally another later Olympia portable (usually in the $75-120 range) earlier in the day went for a more reasonable $232 with a stated/photographed cursive typeface: https://shopgoodwill.com/item/222546740 This one was a stronger deal in the current market as they only paid about $110 above average for that machine to get the script typeface. The tough part is that because the description stated "cursive", they didn't have the benefit of possibly picking up a script machine with less competition.

While this is an interesting microcosm example of the current (overheated?) typewriter market (at least in the US), I hope all the buyers of these machines enjoy their purchases. If they're your first Olympias, and they need some work to get back to fighting shape, I've put together a guide: https://boffosocko.com/2024/07/14/aggregated-resources-and-playlist-for-a-crash-course-on-the-olympia-sm3-portable-typewriter/

syndication link

via https://www.reddit.com/r/typewriters/comments/1iqn5hs/comment/mdakb8r/

Just craft/tacky glue. I painted the machine with the glue and applied the fabric.

via https://old.reddit.com/r/typewriters/comments/1ir50gz/i_covered_a_typewriter_in_fabric_not_sure_how_you/

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050307/quotes

https://www.youtube.com/c/ScorpioMartianus/playlists

via https://old.reddit.com/r/latin/comments/d6nkwy/timeline_for_lingua_latina_books_and_supplements/#lightbox

https://www.reddit.com/r/latin/comments/gvqjfh/grammartranslation_vs_reading_method_which_is_the/?sort=old

Good discussion and outline of research about natural method of language acquisition over grammar-translation method of language acquisition.

Dreamt of learning Latin? Here’s how you’ll finally do it by [[Thomas V. Mirus]]

A non-specialist look at his Latin language acquisition with lots of resources around Hans Ørberg's Lingua Latin text.

Thomas V. Mirus' comparison of Fr. William Most's Latin text with Hans Ørberg's.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7kwvJpbAvI&list=PLU1WuLg45SizQQ5VwufQbCB9rL-Z3VIUJ&index=41&ab_channel=ScorpioMartianus

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yflqUWKVVc&ab_channel=pol%C3%BDMATHY

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knocking_on_wood

Cleaning Typewriter Type Slugs by [[Joe Van Cleave]]

JVC recommends 91% isopropyl alcohol (IPA) for cleaning typeslugs.

Brass bristle brushes from Harbor Freight.

Sally's Beauty Supply stiff nylon brush for cleaning typeslugs.

Bergeon Rodico 6033-1 as a cleaning compound (similar to Silly Putty and other older compounds) for typeslugs.

https://www.coloradoboulevard.net/eaton-fire-lawsuits-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/

https://www.coloradoboulevard.net/caltech-webinar-on-environmental-impacts-of-fires/

https://washingtondc.jhu.edu/news/fire-resistant-designs-community-collaboration-could-be-the-best-defense-against-future-wildfires/

https://www.socalgas.com/fires

https://recovery.lacounty.gov/eaton-fire/

https://pwp.cityofpasadena.net/pasadena-drinking-water-system-impacted-by-eaton-fire/

https://www.pasadenastarnews.com/2025/01/11/black-communities-in-pasadena-altadena-devastated-by-eaton-fire/

https://calfire-forestry.maps.arcgis.com/home/webscene/viewer.html?webscene=0a7381c8b46b4e26a057383424f32c06

https://ops.alertcalifornia.org/cam-console/2478

https://www.fire.ca.gov/incidents/2025/1/7/eaton-fire

https://www.sce.com/outage-center/check-outage-status

https://www.gov.ca.gov/2025/01/07/california-secures-federal-assistance-to-support-response-to-eaton-fire-in-los-angeles-county/

https://fire.airnow.gov/#11.62/34.1826/-118.0887

https://www.airnow.gov/?city=Altadena&state=CA&country=USA

https://www.fema.gov/disaster/recover/faq

https://www.fema.gov/disaster/4856#help-families

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eaton_Fire

https://www.google.com/search?q=altadena+fire+eaton+canyon&oq=altadena+fire+eaton+canyon&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIGCAEQRRhA0gEIODkzMmowajeoAgCwAgA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Folgezettel Will Not Necessarily Create Discrete Topical Sections in Your Zettelkasten by [[Bob Doto]]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mQ5p1pL-M0

https://blog.archive.org/national-emergency-library/

Couple captures dramatic start of Eaton Fire in Altadena, California by Associated Press

reply to u/Active-Teach6311 at https://old.reddit.com/r/Zettelkasten/comments/1ilvvnc/you_need_to_first_define_the_zettlekasten_methoda/

#1 == #2 In German contexts, zettelkasten subsumed both ideas which can easily be seen in the 2013 Marbach Exhibition: Zettelkasten: Machines of Fantasy. That exhibition featured six different Zettelkasten of which Luhmann's was but one. It wasn't until after this that sites like zettelkasten.de, this Reddit sub, or the popularity of Ahrens' book shifted the definition to a Luhmann-centric one, particularly in English language contexts which lacked a marketing term on which to latch to sell the idea. The productivity porn portion of the equation assisted in erasing the prior art and popularity of these methods.

One can easily show mathematically that there is a one-to-one and onto mapping of Luhmann's method with all the other variations. This means that they're equivalent in structure and only differ in the names you give them.

Even Ahrens suggests as much in his own book when he mentions that in digital contexts one doesn't need numbered cards in particular orders for the system to work. If Erasmus, Agricola, or Melanchthon were to magically arrive from the 15th century to the present day, they would have no difficulty recognizing their commonplacing work at play in a so-called Luhmann-artig zettelkasten.

I would suggest that Luhmann didn't write more about his method himself because it would have been generally fruitless for him as everyone around him was doing exactly the same thing. The method was both literally and figuratively commonplace! J. E. Heyde's book, from which Luhmann modeled his own system, went through 10 editions from the 1930s through the 1970s in Luhmann's own lifetime.

Reply to u/FastSascha at https://old.reddit.com/r/Zettelkasten/comments/1ilvvnc/you_need_to_first_define_the_zettlekasten_methoda/mc01tsr/

The primary and really only "innovation" for Luhmann's system was his numbering and filing scheme (which he most likely borrowed and adapted from prior sources). His particular scheme only serves to provide specific addresses for finding his notes. Regardless of doing this explicitly, everyone's notes have a physical address and can be cross referenced or linked in any variety of ways. In John Locke's commonplacing method of 1685/1706 he provided an alternate (but equivalent method) of addressing and allowing the finding of notes. Whether you address them specifically or not doesn't change their shape, only the speed by which they may be found. This may shift an affordance of using such a system, but it is invariant from the form of the system. What I'm saying is that the form and shape of Luhmann's notes is identical to the huge swath of prior art within intellectual history. He was not doing something astoundingly new or different. By analogy he was making the same Acheulean hand axe everyone else was making; it's not as if he figured out a way to lash his axe to a stick and then subsequently threw it to invent the spear.

When I say the method was commonplace at the time, I mean that a broad variety of people used it for similar reasons, for similar outputs, and in incredibly similar methods. You can find a large number of treatises on how to do these methods over time and space, see a variety of examples I've collected in Zotero which I've mentioned several times in the past. Perhaps other German professors weren't using the method(s) as they were slowly dying out over the latter half of the 20th century with the rise and ultimate ubiquity of computers which replaced many of these methods. I'll bet that if probed more deeply they were all doing something and the something they were doing (likely less efficiently and involving less physically evident means) could be seen to be equivalent to Luhmann's.

This also doesn't mean that these methods weren't actively used in a variety of equivalent forms by people as diverse as Aristotle, Cicero, Quintilian, Seneca, Boethius, Thomas Aquinas, Desiderius Erasmus, Rodolphus Agricola, Philip Melancthon, Konrad Gessner, John Locke, Carl Linnaeus, Thomas Harrison, Vincentius Placcius, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, S. D. Goitein, Gotthard Deutsch, Beatrice Webb, Sir James Murray, Marcel Mauss, Claude Lévi-Strauss, Mortimer J. Adler, Niklas Luhmann, Roland Barthes, Umberto Eco, Jacques Barzun, Vladimir Nabokov, George Carlin, Twyla Tharp, Gertrud Bauer, and even Eminem to name but a few better known examples. If you need additional examples to look at, try searching my Hypothesis account for tag:"zettelkasten examples". Take a look at their examples and come back to me and tell me that beyond the idiosyncrasies of their individual use that they weren't all doing the same thing in roughly the same ways and for roughly the same purposes. While the modalities (digital or analog) and substrates (notebooks, slips, pen, pencil, electrons on silicon, other) may have differed, the thing they were doing and the forms it took are all equivalent.

Beyond this, the only thing really unique about Luhmann's notes were that he made them on subjects that he had an interest, the same way that your notes are different from mine. But broadly speaking, they all have the same sort of form, function, and general topology.

If these general methods were so uncommon, how is it that all the manuals on note taking are all so incredibly similar in their prescriptions? How is it that Marbach can do an exhibition in 2013 featuring 6 different zettelkasten, all ostensibly different, but all very much the same?

Perhaps the easier way to see it all is to call them indexed databases. Yours touches on your fiction, exercise, and nutrition; Luhmann's focuses on sociology and systems theory; mine looks at intellectual history, information theory, evolution, and mathematics; W. K. Kellogg's 640 drawer system in 1906 focused on manufacturing, distributing and selling Corn Flakes; Jonathan Edwards' focused on Christianity. They all have different contents, but at the end of the day, they're just indexed databases with the same forms and functionalities. Their time periods, modalities, substrates, and efficiencies have differed, but at their core they're all far more similar in structure than they are different.

Perhaps one day, I'll write a deeper treatise with specific definitions and clearer arguments laying out the entire thing, but in the erstwhile, anyone saying that Luhmann's instantiation is somehow more unique than all the others beyond the meaning expressed by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry in The Little Prince is fooling themselves. Instead, I suspect that by realizing you're part of a longer, tried-and-true tradition, your own practice will be far easier and more useful.

The simplicity of the system (or these multiply-named methods) allows for the rise of a tremendous amount of complexity. This resultant complexity can in turn hide the simplicity of the root system.

“To me, you are still nothing more than a little boy who is just like a hundred thousand other little boys. And I have no need of you. And you, on your part, have no need of me. To you, I am nothing more than a fox like a hundred thousand other foxes. But if you tame me, then we shall need each other. To me, you will be unique in all the world. To you, I shall be unique in all the world..."

I can only hope people choose to tame more than Luhmann.

reply to u/Active-Teach6311 at https://old.reddit.com/r/Zettelkasten/comments/1ilvvnc/you_need_to_first_define_the_zettlekasten_methoda/mc14p0r/

Certainly there are idiosyncracies in how each person chooses to to work with them. The primary difference I see is how much work and when each person chooses to put into a system and what outputs, if any, there are. However, at the end of the day, their similarities as systems far, far exceed their differences. Their principles may differ in slight ways, but in the end they are identical in form. If you feel differently, then I suggest you take a deeper and closer look into the variety of traditions beyond your cursory view.

As a small exercise, attempt to explain why S. D. Goitein's system allowed him to write 1/3 the notes of Luhmann and create almost 3 times the written output? Why aren't people emulating his system? Why are there still dozens of researchers actively sharing and using Goitein's notes when almost none are doing the same for Luhmann?

Another solid exercise is to look at Heyde and explain why Luhmann chose to file his cards differently than was prescribed there? Are the end results really different? Would they have been different if kept in commonplace form using John Locke's indexing method?

reply to u/JeffB1517 at https://old.reddit.com/r/Zettelkasten/comments/1ilvvnc/you_need_to_first_define_the_zettlekasten_methoda/mc1y4oj/

I'm not new here: https://boffosocko.com/research/zettelkasten-commonplace-books-and-note-taking-collection/

You example of a hierarchy was not a definition. In practice Luhmann eschewed hierarchies, though one could easily modify his system to create them. This has been covered ad nauseam here in conversations on top-down and bottom-up thinking.

When "dumping" from one program to another, one can almost always easily get around a variety of affordances supplied by one and not another simply by adding additional data, text, references, links, etc. As an example, my paper system can do Logseq's block level linking by simply writing a card address down and specifying word 7, sentence 3, paragraph 4, etc. One can also do this in Obsidian in a variety of other technical means and syntaxes including embedding notes. Block level linking is a nice affordance when available but can be handled in a variety of different (and structurally similar) ways. Books as a technology have been doing block level linking for centuries; in that context it's called footnotes. In more specialized and frequently referenced settings like scholarship on Plato there is Stephanus pagination or chapter and verse numberings in biblical studies. Roam and Logseq aren't really innovating here.

Similarly your OLE example is a clever and useful affordance, but could be gotten around by providing an equation that is carried out by hand and done each time it's needed---sure it may take more time, but it's doable in every system. This may actually be useful in some contexts as then one would have the time sequences captured and logged in their files for later analysis and display. These affordances are things which may make things easier and simpler in some cases, but they generally don't change the root structure of what is happening. Digital search is an example of a great affordance, except in cases when it returns thousands of hits which then need to be subsequentlly searched. Short indexing methods with pen and paper can be done more quickly in some cases to do the same search because one's notes can provide a lot of other contextual clues (colored cards, wear on cards, physical location of cards, etc.) that a pure digital search does not. I often can do manual searches through 30,000 index cards more quickly and accurately than I can through an equivalent number of digital notes.

There is a structural equivalence between folders and tags/links in many programs. This is more easily seen in digital contexts where a folder can be programatically generated by executing a search on a string or tag which then results in a "folder" of results. These searches are a quick affordance versus actively maintaining explicit folders otherwise, but the same result could be had even in pen and paper contexts with careful indexing and manual searches (which may just take longer, but it doesn't mean that they can't be done.) Edge-notched cards were heavily used in the mid-20th century to great effect for doing these sorts of searches.

When people here are asking or talking about a variety of note taking programs, the answer almost always boils down to which one you like best because, in large part, a zettlkasten can be implemented in all of them. Some may just take more work and effort or provide fewer shortcuts or affordances.

reply to u/JeffB1517 at https://old.reddit.com/r/Zettelkasten/comments/1ilvvnc/you_need_to_first_define_the_zettlekasten_methoda/mc0f8ip/

Explain your definition of hierarchical reference system. How is one note in his system higher, better, or more important than another? Where do you see hierarchies?

Infinitely long notes can easily be excerpted down to smaller sizes and filed, so that portion of your argument doesn't track.

Luhmann had what some call "hub notes" and the ability to remove cards and rearrange them to suit his compositional needs and later refile them. This directly emulates the similar ideas of MOCs, whiteboards, and mind maps. Victor Margolin's example quickly shows how this is done in practice.

If there weren't direct mappings, it should be impossible to copy & paste Luhmann's notes into Obsidian, Logseq, OneNote, Evernote, Excel, or even Wikipedia. This is not the case. You might get slightly different personal affordances out of these tools or perhaps better speed and in other cases even less speed or worse review patterns of your notes, but in ultimate form they are identical and will ultimately allow you to accomplish all of the same end results.

We might argue about efficiencies, affordances, or speed, but at the end of the day they're all still structurally similar.

Introduction to Luhmann's Zettelkasten by [[Yann Herklotz]]

https://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/lookupid?key=olbp70294

References source: http://www.celtic-twilight.com/camelot/bruce_dictionary/index.htm which can be found on the Internet Archive (original site is dead) at.

https://web.archive.org/web/20170522152947/http://www.celtic-twilight.com/camelot/bruce_dictionary/index.htm

https://www.ted.com/talks/matt_ridley_when_ideas_have_sex

Here's the reference for TB, from our discussion

mention

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S._(Dorst_novel)?

This was mentioned to me at an IndieWebCamp event today.

Seems interesting with respect to the meta portions of books.

Looks like the sort of thing that @remikalir and @anterobot may be interested in.

In Praise of (Foot- End- Etc.) Notes<br /> by [[Ross Gay]] on September 21, 2023

esp. "mycelial love note"

John Hodgson Wrote a 166 Page Footnote on Diplograph

["It's Friday. Have some history.

So you know Hadrian's Wall? Well for over 1000 years everyone thought it was built by someone else.

Until, in 1840, John Hodgson, an unknown Northumbrian clergyman published the LONGEST footnote in history.

Read on... /1 https://t.co/HNU4EU9qBL" / X](https://x.com/garius/status/1570771789827166208) by [[John Bull]] on Twitter

Full thread at: <br /> https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1570771789827166208.html

Hurd, Cuthbert C., ed. Proceedings: IBM Computation Seminar December 1949. New York: Internation Buisiness Machines Corporation, 1951. http://archive.org/details/bitsavers_ibmproceedeminarDec49_14295048.

In a variety of context here the idea of "cards" could be held to be synonymous with "notes".

Collision cards (though used in a physics setting) could be a bit hilarious with the idea of "atomic notes" and the idea of "combinatorial creativity".

Inspired by https://archive.org/details/bitsavers_ibmpunched3SorterDec59_4145011/page/n23/mode/2up

The older note taking tradition of using cards of equal size became much more important in the era of edge-notched and punched cards. Standardization came to be of an even higher level of importance.

https://www.reddit.com/r/typewriters/comments/1ijiwn0/hermes_10_repair/

Interesting to see them quote Vannevar Bush right at the top here, while they're using paper-based technology to move toward the Memex.

Brand names of some common edge-notched cards

An indication of the state-of-the-art in punch card systems from 1951 to 1958, particularly with respect to practical applications.

Casey, Robert S., James W. Perry, Madeline M. Berry, and Allen Kent. Punched Cards: Their Applications To Science And Industry. 2nd ed. 1951. Reprint, New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation, 1958. http://archive.org/details/PunchedCardsTheirApplicationsToScienceAndIndustry.

Begun, George M. “Making Your Own Punched Cards.” Journal of Chemical Education 32, no. 6 (June 1, 1955): 328. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed032p328.

George Begun used a template of "heavy galvanized iron" to drill holes into his 5 x 8" index cards to create his own edge-noted card system for use in his chemistry work. Rather than using commercially made sorting needles, he recommended the use of a ice pick with a dulled point "for safety".

https://gist.github.com/judell/b651640dbe9bf7d01e157e9a1ef60a66

https://old.reddit.com/r/typewriters/comments/w1k8lq/vintage_typewriter_repair_resources/

https://selectric.org/selectric/

https://www.rilko.org/

Replacing the Carriage on a Royal Portable Typewriter by [[Marty Morren]]

https://www.m-morren.nl/product/17071027/royal-bearing-guide-ball-feeder-tool

Triumph Adler Tippa / Tippa S / Contessa De Luxe Service Manual - T.A. Vertriebs-GmbH Nürnberg<br /> by [[T.A. Vertriebs-GmbH Nürnberg]]

Typewriter Video Series - Episode 231: Petite Toy Typewriter by [[Joe Van Cleave]]

Edge-Notched Cards: A queryable database...made of paper by [[Soren Bjornstad]]

https://www.etsy.com/listing/943701460/border-punched-cards-vintage-edge-punch

https://www.etsy.com/listing/1830543660/border-punched-cards-vintage-edge-punch

https://christophermschwarz.com/

Illustration by Beppe Giacobbe

Harper's Magazine, April 2022, page 26 https://harpers.org/archive/2022/04/

What do we know about high school graduates?

Lane, Patrick, Colleen Falkenstern, and Peace Bransberger. “Knocking at the College Door: Projections of High School Graduates, 11th Edition.” Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE), December 2024. https://www.wiche.edu/knocking/.

PDF at https://www.wiche.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/2024-Knocking-at-the-College-Door-final.pdf

Knocking at the College Door, 11th Edition

https://www.reddit.com/r/AYearOfMythology/comments/1i5zf4f/translation_guide_the_mabinogion/

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1RXWxLqTyWvAuq8A0PgaBuWeEn_G6qTLyTZ8lzfNEaNw/edit?gid=314416722#gid=314416722

Maui’s post-wildfire housing crisis offers a warning for Los Angeles by [[Jack Ross]], [[Capital and Main]]

Edison wants to raise rates to pay for wildfires linked to its equipment - Los Angeles Times by [[Melody Petersen]]

Holy shit!

How much of the average bill is paying for covering past fire payouts?

As western Altadena waited hours for evacuation orders, fire commanders faced utter chaos - Los Angeles Times by [[Terry Castleman]], [[Grace Toohey]]

https://warn.pbs.org/

Your car didn't escape the fire? Here's how to get rid of it - Los Angeles Times by [[Karen Garcia]]

I see a Hermes 3000 typewriter on the shelf behind AOC here. The true "Green New Deal"!

ᔥ[[BonchBomber]] in Spotted on AOC’s shelf : r/typewriters

LA Wildfires: Impacts on Altadena’s Black Community<br /> by [[UCLA Bunche Center]]

https://www.instagram.com/stuartpalley/reel/DEkzbkyRIvj/?hl=en

reply to u/Ill_Tear8308

Not so much that they're proprietary, but the Zephyr, Skyriter, and later Corsairs used the 1 5/8" diameter spools, which fit about 12 yards of ribbon versus the more common universal 2" spools which will hold 16 yards of ribbon.

1/2" wide ribbon should work on this. Sellers include: https://site.xavier.edu/polt/typewriters/tw-faq.html#q1

If you wind it onto pre-existing spools keep in mind that Smith-Coronas typically used eyelets in the ribbon to effect the auto-ribbon reverse, though you could certainly do it manually if you needed to.

There aren't a lot of examples of Empire-Coronas in the typewriter database, so be sure to include your example with photos:

https://typewriterdatabase.com/empire.24.typewriter-serial-number-database

https://typewriterdatabase.com/Empire.-Corona+Skyriter.24.bmys

Film clip of Helen Keller at her home in Westport, CT. She is seen pulling a book from her library s... 1953 by [[Helen Keller Archive]]

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.

https://www.suppliesshops.com/737534-x-32534-white-pinfeed-index-cards-perfed-4000-cards-per-carton-p-38937.html?gQT=1

These are the sorts of cards one would use with something like my Singer Business Card Index filing cabinet.

https://warrenpaper.com/product/1003/

https://warrenpaper.com/product/1001/

https://warrenpaper.com/

https://spencergreenhalgh.com/communities/the-missionary-with-the-expired-visa/

Eaton Fire is Fully Contained

https://old.reddit.com/r/typewriters/comments/16s3u8o/i_found_this_cool_service_guid_in_one_of_my/

ᔥ Alan Jacobs

https://bluecreeper.com/

Good, deep work. by [[Richard Polt]]