/lit/ - Literature

What year do you think it is, OP?

>are manual typewriters worth it?

you have a computer so, no.

>are they generally in working condition, or are easy to fix?

generally working condition.

>is it better to find them in a store and look at them, or do any of you have luck ordering online?

use ebay or something.

>>3350665
>you have a computer so, no.
no fun

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4nwe7cW_og

>>3350670
writing isn't fun

Hipsters gon' hipst.

>>3350670
if you wouldn't like to know the answer, don't ask.

They're fun and all, but, even being generally enthusiastic about them, I find that the effort required to strike the keys effectively and constantly is so unlike one's normal typing habits that, being a certain tactile and aesthetic pleasure, they're not something functional. And don't be a dick like the dude in the picture.

tldr: They're fun and easy enough to service, but don't pay too much because it'll sit on a shelf.

>>3350669
This is painful to watch.

>>3350669
>that ding

>worth it

what do you mean worth it? worth what?

>>3350684
He is obviously joking, brah, cheer up.

>>3350707
the energy to get one and the inflated ego

>>3350712
no, just use a pen or a computer

faggot

>>3350660
It creates a different kind of writing experience than a computer. Everything you write stays there and while you can still cut things out with ease, you have to have a reason to do so, you have to think it over and you have to write it all again. I do more work on my typewriter, I do better work, and I'm far less distracted. I would never think of typing in public unless I was in full 1940's getup because it looks plain goofy otherwise. They're cheap and they're fun and they each have their own feel. Get one in good condition off of ebay for like 20-60 bucks and try it out.

>>3350722
>implying I'm ever going to write in public
thanks, I'll order one tonight

No. The reason typewriters seem appealing to you is because all of your literary idols used one. Hemingway, Nabokov, Hunter Thompson, whoever the fuck you read. And the only reason they did, is coz they didn't have a fucking computer. Now stop being an anachronistic little faggot that romanticises previous generations, and use a laptop.

>>3350735
>romanticises previous generations
I just think they look cool

all those little moving parts...

>>3350735
Because telling people to conform to modern technology because modern technology is modern will totally convince people that you're right and that liking old things is gay.

no of course not they're fucking obnoxious and inconvenient

i mean, if they're an ingrained part of your writing process, sure, do it. and if you think they're really cool or whatever, go for it bud. i just think that you probably suck.

>>3350737
why do you think you think they look cool?

I don't know what is worse: people justifying the use of typewriters or people who somehow hate typewriters and trying to justify, for others, the reasons to why they are using typewriters.

You guys seriously can't into object fetishism at all.

You don't need to give reasons.

>>3350796
>I don't know what is worse: people justifying the use of typewriters or people who somehow hate typewriters and trying to justify, for others, the reasons to why they are using typewriters.

how very true

I use a typewriter whenever I want to test myself. As a completely different writing experience, it changes what I write. It forces me to think fast and hit hard. God mode: not typo-ing all over the fucking place.

We have all kinds of technology to write. Pen and ink, notebooks and pencils, typewriters, computers, even the fucking iPad. ANd each one prodcues a different kind of writing.

But yeah, you're a fucking hipster if this thought was not in your head before I said it. I grew up writing school papers with the old typewriter I still used today.

I love typewriters.

If you appreciate things like the feel of mechanical keyboards or working on motorcycles or guns or just old technology you will probably really enjoy typewriters as well.

I have two smith coronas and use them daily. One was purchased in fairly rough condition from a garage sale which I "restored" with a bit of rubbing alcohol, a toothbrush, canned air, and some silicone lubricant. I find it beautiful to look at and use and enjoy over caring for it with maintenance it probably does not need. The other was bought in near mint condition for less than the other, as it was newer and the people selling it just wanted to get rid of it, but I prefer the older one.

I can't say it is "practical" to write on a typewriter, not for everyone, but the experience is so different it's hard to compare to a computer. I write differently on a typewriter, as I would write differently if I were writing by hand, and that difference is where you might learn to appreciate the experience or grow frustrated.

Is it worth it? I think so, you can probably go to your local goodwill or any second hand shop and find a clean, working typewriter for ~$5, which is very little for what you are potentially getting. Definitely worth trying out if you aren't sure, you don't stand to lose much.

The biggest risk is growing to like typewriters too much and becoming a collector. Typewriters aren't expensive but usually you will be losing money, they're prices don't tend to appreciate despite what ebay might lead you to believe.

>>3350660
I have one and enjoy using it, I like the mechanical action

However a computer is objectively far superior

>>3350660
I have one and enjoy using it, I like the mechanical action and general feeling of effort you get from them

However a computer is objectively far superior

>>3350847
>>3350848

>objectively
oh boy

you better start clarifying what you mean by "superior" or risk appearing pretty foolish

>>3350856
Sorry, I just need to alert you to the fact that it is YOU who are risking appearing foolish by arguing with anon about the definition of the word "superior" in a thread about TYPEWRITERS.
Folks, I couldn't make this kind of comedy up if I tried.

>>3350856
Easier to use, easier to correct mistakes, automatic spell check, no ink requirement, absolutely no physical effort etc, operator likely more familiar with using a computer, consistent spacing, variable fonts, variable text size etc.

Basically its allot more convenient

>>3350787
>all those little moving parts...

>>3350861
I would argue that typewriters make superior paperweights, superior bludgeons, superior hipster status symbols, superior doorstops, superior antiques, etc.

No reason to step in just to present yourself like as idiot, especially when it isn't even your fight.

>>3350862
>allot
That aside I think everything you are listing as superior really depends on the user's familiarity with whatever they are using.

Typewriters, I would argue, are much easier to use than computers to just put words on the page because it is analog, computer word processors are abstractions. To someone unfamiliar with using either I am sure the typewriter would be much easier to use.

I can agree with the rest of what you are saying for anyone already familiar with computers, though for the sake off being contrarian, I would say there is a certain placebo involved in writing on a typewriter that can manifest as "better" writing. Creating something artistic has an experiential aspect that is difficult to explain and does not always favor the more functional experience.

I use a manual typewriter to test out ideas, but actual extensive writing should be done on a computer (and as much as I hate to reach any sort of concordance with Jonathan Franzen, it should preferably be one without an Internet connection).

If you find one in working condition and it's not pre-'60s, you shouldn't pay more than $30 for one on Craigslist. You can also usually find some in Goodwills and thrift stores of the like; careful about those 1980s typewriters -they technically write better (they're basically MS Word machines that instantly print but have no editing options) but they use some weird ink cartridge things that might not be sold anymore, whereas I know they still sell the traditional spool ribbon at Office Depot and the like.

Don't buy anything that needs fixing, you're likely to be unable to fix it yourself (unless you genuinely want to give it a go, make sure it's cheap).

I've seen places where you can order them online but they're all refurbished and cost between $200 and $500 on mrtypewriter.com. Etsy faggots sell them for a bit cheaper, but at that point you might just be paying for a gigantic paperweight.

>>3350735
Honestly I respect this reasoning more than some of the other shit I've heard. Some hipster in one of my classes went on about how much more "real" and "authentic" it felt to type on his ---electronic--- typewriter.

His stupid voice still haunts me

>>3350821
Don't you get sick of retyping entire chapters every time the wind decides to blow? Or you change your mind about literally anything

>>3350735
Nabokov wrote by hand and had his sexy secretary type all his shit up for him. Doing it right.

>>3351272
>sexy secretary

Aka his meh wife.

>>3351270
>Don't you get sick of retyping entire chapters every time the wind decides to blow?

Where are you writing that this could possibly even happen?

>Reading a HOW TO WRITE book from the 90s.
>First page: Find yourself a good typewriter. Don't trust computers.

I skimmed the rest of the book before finding a much newer one.

>>3351367
wind tunnel, brah. Just like Dostoevsky

>>3350722
>I would never think of typing in public unless I was in full 1940's getup because it looks plain goofy otherwise.
Yeah, if you play it like that it won't look ridiculous at all. I'm the same way, I don't take my sword with me unless I'm in full armour.

>>3350660
It is if you are a morbidly fetishistic hipster piece of shit.

>>3350796
>You guys seriously can't into object fetishism at all. You don't need to give reasons.

Yes, because as we all know, an object fetish is this magical, supernatural thing which unlike any other natural phenomenon doesn't require a cause to come into existence.
Bonus points if you rationalize this un-concept by reference to the pontifications of some rambling tshirt-of-the-week pomo theory icon on the subject of fetishism.

>not fetishizing current and future technology
>fetishizing obsolete trinkets from the past

Sure is escapist steampunk roleplay faggots in here.

>>3350735
I think it's also a bit performative, despite what OP says.

>>3350660
I bought a typewriter for 25 bucks when my laptop got confiscated. Never regretted it. It's an adorable little portable erika. It's just a pity that the l key is broken.

How old are you faggots?

I learnt to use a typewriter when I was a kid, this was before computers were good enough to write stuff, the late 80's. It wasn't that amazing.

And I'm 27.

>>3351531
Fuck the haters. Those costumes look awesome and it looks like they're having heaps of fun.

Still, use a typewriter in public and you're going to look like a tool.

>>3351570
How does one get ones laptop confiscated?

>>3351582
I'm 25 and I went straight to computer at four years old. Guess you have precisely the age to just witness the end of an era.

Writing, from its originating essence, is hand-writing. ... In handwriting the relation of Being to man, namely the word, in inscribed in beings themselves. ... Therefore when writing was withdrawn from the origin of its essence, i.e., from the hand, and was transferred to the machine, a transformation occurred in the relation of Being to man. ... In the typewriter we find the irruption of the mechanism in the realm of the word. ... The typewriter veils the essence of writing and of the script. It withdraws from man the essential rank of the hand ...

>>3351613
You must have been born in 87/88?

My grandmother taught me how to use a typewriter, but when I went into first grade they were just bringing in computers.

>>3351582
I'm 28 and I only ever used a typewriter while goofing around on the display models at department stores. Even then I was really young - as you say, it was the late 80s. I went to a kinda dumpy inner-city public grade school and while we had really old and outdated computers, we still had computers. Only the special ed blind kids ever used typewriters and those were special models used for writing in braille.

>>3351606
I had a... well, the englisch word is minder? I don't know. Anyway, I think I called her a stupid bitch. Maybe I punched someone. I don't know. Anyway, laptop gone.

>>3351582
Uh...word processing software had existed for years by the late eighties. Microsoft Works was fucking robust when I first used it in 1991.

>>3351636
Beginning of '88, yes. I don't remember if we had computers in the classroom in the beginning though. I remember doing my first typing in my dad's little home office.

>>3351647
I thought you maybe had debt/tax problems. I'm often thinking of getting a special hiding spot for my phone and laptop in case the government comes to collect.

>>3351665
they're going to know you have one anyway.

>>3350862
Perhaps if you're writing requires the greatest technical facility. But, as others have pointed out, technical "disadvantages" can turn into artistic advantages.

>>3351651
Computers were too shit to print stuff and businesses were still using typewriters in 1990

>>3351676
>Computers were too shit to print stuff
No.

>>3351676
>>3351679
The cheapest printers from the 80s were electronic typewriter style printers. Wouldn't have made any difference in print quality, only in making editing way more difficult.

>>3351695
Computers make editing more difficult? I'm confucius.

>>3351698
I meant the other way around. You can correct far more easily on the computer. Although a lot of electronic typewriters had a correction ribbon and tip-ex spraying thing, so you could backspace and do some corrections.

>>3351679
Dont you remember how printers were back then? They had to scan every line. And how shit it looked, and on that paper that was all joined together?

Typewritten stuff looked way better. Anyway point was businesses didnt adopt it til the early 90's, not that the tech didnt exist

>>3351715
A lot of businesses were using computers back in the 80s. Remember Superman III?

>>3351715
>drawing massive landscapes on those joined reams of paper
Kids are really missing out, nowadays.

>>3350660
That kid is a stain on humanity

>>3351416
In the 90s this was still a valid point.

Computers sucked back then.

>>3352029
In the nineties? You must be pretty young to think that. Word processing software was fucking robust come 1990. Hell, it was perfectly serviceable throughout the eighties. If you had said "in the 70s this was a valid point, computers sucked back then" you may have not made a fool of yourself.

have you guys read that part on foucault's pendulum where jacopo belbo exalts his word processor, abulafia, and the process of writing in it above writing by hand or in a typewriter?

>>3352039
It was still acceptable for computers to randomly crash, have horrible bugs and simply not work properly. Writing an email to your grandma might have been okay, or stuff that couldn't be done any other way, but I doubt basing you entire manuscript on Bill Gates was a smart idea back then.

>>3351722
That was a movie. In real life the government and most businesses weren't using computers til like 1992-95. Even windows 3.1 didn't come out til 1992. In 88 I remember people still had this attitude that computers were a fad and go away. Computers were for nerds and weirdos, the average person still used a typewriter.

>>>3352039
>1990
That was when windows 3.0 had just come out, and if you remember correctly, it was fucking shit. Most still used DOS with its green/orange on black screen. That didn't make for good 'word processing' at all.

I'd imagine it's faster than writing by hand, but with more substantial-feeling results than some file buried in your computer that can be deleted instantly; seeing a stack of printed paper is a psychological incentive to work on your writing. It's an awkward and outdated item that creates a sense of ritual, like a record player, so it's a luxury for private studies only. If you don't own a dressing gown and a mechanical watch, you're probably not rich enough for it not to seem frivolous, impractical, and possibly posturing, to other people.

>>3352066

This guy is right. I remember when 3.1 came out. You still had to use the command line to do almost everything, even with a GUI. Imagine if they did that EVEN TODAY. Most people would just not use computers instead of learning. So no, comps werent adopted until....probly major widespread use began when 95' came out. Maybe a bit before that.

>>3352101
but you guys talk in assumption people only used MS-DOS and protozoaic windows.
how about the Macintosh with their complete GUI, pointing devices, ease of use that only later was mildly succesfully copied for microsoft?

>>3352403

Youre point being taken into consideration, widespread computer use DID rise with Microsoft, not Apple. Thats a fact. Just because Mac had the first home PC on the market for cheap(ish) doesnt mean that they ushered in a new age. Itd be hard to make an argument that Microsoft wasnt the one who kicked everything into gear.

pick yourself up one of these bad boys at a thrift store somewhere for the feel of a typewriter

best $5 ive ever spent

>>3352403
The Macintosh in the 80s was still seen as something "too expensive" for huge offices and businesses in general. Only the people who had money to waste were getting a Macintosh.

Think of it like cellphones. People started using them only during the 90s, while the 80s had cell phones already.

>>3351507
>magical, supernatural thing which unlike any other natural phenomenon doesn't require a cause to come into existence.
What a misunderstanding. I specifically said one doesn't need to give reasons, not that there are no reasons to avoid this confusion.

The cause is there, it's just preposterous to assume you are aware of all causes or even more absurd: that you should. "To give reasons" means here to justify your attitude for the other, not much to explain.

If the parents ask you why she is the girl for you, you may say that you love her, and they may ask why you love her, and you may say that she just fits you, and they may ask why again... And if this goes on, you won't ever get married.

Certain things are better left without rationalizing, not because they are unreasonable, but because this reason works through means that don't concern you and often don't harm you. And as you chase after it, you lose it and the reason ceases to be.

The discussion was revolving around an invisible, magical, supernatural obligation to explain oneself to others (and to oneself) and give rational insight into causes that are emotional or even ultimately unknown (which doesn't mean non-existent). Well, I can't think of a more irrational thing to do.

>>3352577
More like the 2000's. Phones weren't coming into mainstream use til at least 1999-2001 with those black and white nokias

>>3352597
>talking about nokias
>not taking in account previous, mainstream motorola bricks

Alphasmart was here, actually having advantages over computers like reliability and months of battery life + batter portability

Typewriters are faggots

>>3352640
>Fuck you bitch. Imma use my abacus.

>are manual typewriters worth it?

Even at the beginning of last century most writers wrote their drafts with paper and ink and then borrowed a typewriter (or hire one to use one for you). It made you write faster and made easier to make corrections or edit parts. You get advantage over that limitation on a digital word processor.

The problem in modern days is that most literary agents and publishing houses will ask you for both a digital and printed copies of the manuscript you're trying to sell, that way using a typewriter will double your work in typing instead of creating.

If that is not on your priorities, you just want to write and play with it, go ahead try one. There are lots on craiglist, and yes don't buy one that needs fixing.

>>3352534

I find this being a great idea.

I found a typewriter and played with it for a while, and I discovered that I am spoiled by modern technology and would rarely press the keys hard enough to actually make them work. I would also press them too quickly and get multiple arms up and jammed. I guess if you type slowly and with the force of ten men then it could be satisfying, but personally I find them cumbersome and hard to use.

>>3352534

Model M's actually go for quite a bit if people know their value. You'll probably have to hand out $50 if you get it off ebay or similar (much more or maybe less depending on what year it was made). Still, if you're persistent you'll find one for free or cheap if you look through a few old warehouses and dumps.

>>3352534
My old high school computer laboratory had these, and they felt orgasmic. I didn't even know back then that they were something "special" but I liked it a lot when I was trying to type out my essay using these, because the sounds the keys made were so nice. Then one day, the laboratory got remade and they upgraded everything, and guess what? They replaced every IBM keyboard we had for some fucking cheap chinese made brands. Worst day ever.

>>3351471

Full fucktard communicates self-awareness of how ridiculous you look. Half fucktard makes you look like a hipster shit.

If you're interested in typewriters then you should definitely get one. Like someone who is enthusiastic about watches, it's fun to tinker with and maintenance them in your free time. But if you actually want one to replace your computer or a pen and paper for actually writing shit then I don't think it's worth it.

"what?" they say, "you got a
computer?"

it's like I have sold out to
the enemy.

I had no idea so many
people were prejudiced
against
computers.

even two editors have
written me letters about
the computer.

one disparaged the
computer in a mild and
superior way.
the other seemed
genuinely
pissed.

I am aware that a
computer can't create
a poem.
but neither can a
typewriter.

yet, still, once or
twice a week
I hear:
"what?
you have a
computer?
you?"

yes, I do
and I sit up here
almost every
night,
sometimes with
beer or
wine,
sometimes
without
and I work the
computer.
the damn thing
even corrects
my spelling.

and the poems
come flying
out,
better than
ever.

I have no
idea what causes
all this
computer
prejudice.

>>3352828
me?
I want to go
the next step
beyond the
computer.
I'm sure it's
there.

and when I get
it,
they'll say,
"hey, you hear,
Chinaski got a
space-biter!"

"what? "

"yes, it's true!"

"I can't believe
it!"

and I'll also have
some beer or
some wine
or maybe nothing
at all
and I'll be
85 years old
driving it home
to
you and me
and to the little girl
who lost her
sheep.
or her
computer.