Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cormac McCarthy's Olivetti Lettera 32

classictypewriter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 42 posts

Re: Cormac McCarthy's Olivetti Lettera 32

#21

Post by akeck »

rcarr wrote: post #20

I was toying with buying a typewriter and a scanner and then using said typewriter for all first drafts and scanning them into the computer with OCR software to save time having to type them up. However I ended up discovering that the Apple Pencil and handwriting recognition in Nebo Notes is insanely good so I use that instead. I still might end up trying out the typewriter/scanner method at some point in the future…

In his interview with Tim Ferris, Neil says that he writes his drafts all the way though before editing in a bound notebook with a fountain pen.

Re: Cormac McCarthy's Olivetti Lettera 32

#23

Post by ncphil »

A friend had this very same machine, causing me much envy. Meanwhile, I got through college and law school with a government refurbished Underwood that was the polar opposite of portable. By the time I went back for my masters (in history, the law thing didn't take) I was using vde and tex on a Kaypro 1. Those old manual typewriters were great, but editing and formatting with a computer was considerably less fatiguing: unless you had to write your own daisywheel printer driver to get some output. If I'd known how hard that was going to be, I would have stuck with the Underwood. Or maybe looked for a used Selectric.

Re: Cormac McCarthy's Olivetti Lettera 32

#24

Post by rcme »

rcarr wrote: post #20

I was toying with buying a typewriter and a scanner and then using said typewriter for all first drafts and scanning them into the computer with OCR software to save time having to type them up. However I ended up discovering that the Apple Pencil and handwriting recognition in Nebo Notes is insanely good so I use that instead. I still might end up trying out the typewriter/scanner method at some point in the future…

I recommend writing on a typewriter. Only being able to go forward acts as a forcing function for writing. The lack of distraction is also nice. You're not going to randomly find yourself on HN, for instance.

Re: Cormac McCarthy's Olivetti Lettera 32

#26

Post by shoo »

ncphil wrote: post #23

A friend had this very same machine, causing me much envy. Meanwhile, I got through college and law school with a government refurbished Underwood that was the polar opposite of portable. By the time I went back for my masters (in history, the law thing didn't take) I was using vde and tex on a Kaypro 1. Those old manual typewriters were great, but editing and formatting with a computer was considerably less fatiguin…

> polar opposite of portable

For some reason, this makes me think of pipe organs.

If there's a ten point portability scale, maybe a pipe organ could be 1, a piano might be 2. A pencil could be 10. A sausage dog might be an 8 or 9. Some of these would be more practical writing instruments than others. I'm not familiar with Underwood typewriters, but my arms are feeling tired merely after looking at some photos online. It might be around a 3 or a 4 on our portability scale.

Re: Cormac McCarthy's Olivetti Lettera 32

#27

Post by biztos »

rcme wrote: post #24
rcarr wrote: post #20

I was toying with buying a typewriter and a scanner and then using said typewriter for all first drafts and scanning them into the computer with OCR software to save time having to type them up. However I ended up discovering that the Apple Pencil and handwriting recognition in Nebo Notes is insanely good so I use that instead. I still might end up trying out the typewriter/scanner method at some point in the future…

I recommend writing on a typewriter. Only being able to go forward acts as a forcing function for writing. The lack of distraction is also nice. You're not going to randomly find yourself on HN, for instance.

Writing with pen (or pencil) on paper gives you "paged" real-time random access, plus the ability to illustrate at any resolution. The satisfying scratch of the roller ball on the paper tooth is also available in some hardware configurations.

I agree about the typewriter but there's a lot to be said for actual writing too.

Re: Cormac McCarthy's Olivetti Lettera 32

#28

Post by fipar »

dsr_ wrote: post #18

For many authors, the tools they used were not the result of obsessive comparisons and ranking, but what was available, that they could afford. And if they decided to replace them, the replacement was likely to have only slightly more research applied: it must be portable because the old heavy one hurts to move around, or it must be heavy because the dog keeps knocking the portable off the table. We live in the time…

This, so much.

I learned to type on a typewriter. I sadly don’t remember the brand or model as I was a kid, but in my house, we used it /kind of/ as one would use a printer now. We did not type stuff from scratch there. Too expensive (IIRC paper was more of a problem than the ink ribbon, but again, I was a kid). We wrote on paper, by hand, and typed things up when they were ready in their final form.

I love love /loved/ that typewriter and would love to have it now to use it every now and then (not sure to write what though, I’m not a writer), but I feel there’s a bit of cargo-cult writing now involving them. As you say, writers used the tool they had at hand. It was no life hack to use a typewriter, it was just better to share text than handwriting for most people.

Re: Cormac McCarthy's Olivetti Lettera 32

#29

Post by biztos »

lqet wrote: post #15

I will never replace my trusted ORGA Modell 9 [0] as my doomsday writing machine. This thing served in the office of a painter's business for 3 generations until the mid-90ies, is nearly 100 years old and is still working perfectly . Just imagine a desktop computer, or a laptop, serving 3 generations for more than 60 years. [0] https://ireland.apollo.olxcdn.com/v1/files/h5jm4s38hndf3-PL/...

That's a beautiful machine. What language is it designed for?

And how fast can you type on it? You might need to hurry on doomsday but this looks more suited to poetry than urgent communiqués in the AI Wars.

Re: Cormac McCarthy's Olivetti Lettera 32

#30

Post by rcme »

biztos wrote: post #27
rcme wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recommend writing on a typewriter. Only being able to go forward acts as a forcing function for writing. The lack of distraction is also nice. You're not going to randomly find yourself on HN, for instance.

Writing with pen (or pencil) on paper gives you "paged" real-time random access, plus the ability to illustrate at any resolution. The satisfying scratch of the roller ball on the paper tooth is also available in some hardware configurations. I agree about the typewriter but there's a lot to be said for actual writing too.

The issue I have with pen-and-paper writing is that I don't have the stamina to do it for long. It's quite a work out for your hand.
Post reply on HN