The converter conundrum

[Juantxo]

Well, I'm going out on a limb now. The converter. The cartouche. The piston filler.

For many years I have seen fountain pens under the light of their filling mechanism. My all-encompassing premise has been that converter filled pens are inferior. Period. Thus, I have only been interested in piston filled pens and capillary fillers like the Parker 61. Thus my preference for the 61 and Pelikans. I admit to having looked down on the converter system as a cheap cop-out.

There, I said it. Regarding the 61, they are old pens, beautiful pens, and in not all cases the capillary filler works perfectly, so those I mostly keep safely away and every once in a while take them out to admire their beauty. But Pelikans from the 600 and upper ranges rock my world, as well as the Toledos and tiny 1931s.

As of lately, and under the inebriating influence of Jim, Richard, et el., I have been overlooking the converter "flaw". For instance, I have always loved lacquer ST Duponts... except for the converter. Now I like the ST Dupont better. I even went to the extent of buying a rather expensive Nakata... with converter. And I've become obsessed with the Waterman Le Man 100... with converter.

Still, though, each time I have to fill up a converter I can't help thinking that someone is making fun of me, deriding me, for handling such lowly plastic gimmick. And when I go to a Pelikan, I'm overwhelmed with deep respect. By the way, I abstain from using a cartouche... oh, so grammar school.

Of course, please add a single grain of salt to all of the above, and just fire away. I'll love you all the same.