
One of the reasons that I'm so drawn to brown ink, I've realized, is its tendency to suggest antiquity. Other colours have their own connotations -- Roland Barthes once wrote a wonderful little essay that touched upon this subject; sadly, no one has ever thought to translate it into English -- but it's brown alone, for me, that indelibly conjures up the past. This, I'm sure, is because whenever I've seen a crumbling manuscript from much earlier times, my eye has been drawn to what are almost always sepia letters. And if the Ink Quest is devoted, among other things, to the preservation of a way of writing that reaches back centuries but is now threatened by the rule of the ballpoint, it makes perfect sense for an obsession with brown ink to be tattooed upon its pages.
I've just discovered something rather bizarre, though: the brown ink seen today in many ancient manuscripts would not originally have been that colour. Allow me to explain (with a little help from the fascinating source, The Ink Corrosion Website, that has alerted me to this fact). From the late medieval period until the middle of the last century, it was common to use iron gall ink whenever indelible lettering was required. While this ink would have appeared black when it was first used, the passage of time regularly sees iron gall script become a brown colour, as the iron in the ink gradually corrodes. In effect, the words start to rust.
It's still possible to buy iron gall ink today, and I'm very tempted to acquire a bottle, as I like the thought of my handwriting ageing and gradually decaying with me. (I do apologize for the macabre quality of the end of that last sentence. As if my recent jaunt through Philip Roth's Everyman were not gloomy enough, I've just started digging my way through Patrimony, Roth's non-fictional account of the end of his father's life.) Roland Barthes, Jacques Derrida, and Michel Foucault have all written about how Western culture has traditionally mistrusted writing because of its ability to outlive its author. (As soon as I write something down, for instance, I can drop dead, but my death does not kill the ability of those words to carry on meaning. I cannot, therefore, be the one who guarantees and oversees the sense of what I inscribe. For proof of this, see the writings of Barthes, Derrida, and Foucault, all of whom are now dead.) I wonder, though, if the rusting of iron gall ink complicates such an understanding of the written word. What if handwriting, so bright and fresh when it emerges from the nib, fades and withers with the hand that produced it? What if we show our age in our ink, and not just our skin, our hair, our posture? These are grave matters, dear readers.
Ink in use today: Waterman Havana.
Ironic post-script, 30/5/06: As I was having my hair cut this morning, I suddenly noticed that the clumps of hair falling onto the cape and the floor were not quite recognizable to me. My hair naturally has a vague rust-like tint to it (this can, I believe, be traced to the red-haired grandfather who started this whole terrible obsession by leaving me a Parker 61 when he died in 1974; I was a toddler at the time, so my parents wisely delayed presenting me with the gift). Well, it had such a tint, anyway, for I noticed for the first time this morning that it's starting to lose its colour ever so slightly. Yes, that's right, dear readers, it's developing a midlife-crisis-inspiring touch of grey. In other words, most ironically, what was in my youth the colour of rust is gradually ageing into the colour of fresh iron filings. I think, on reflection, that I'm going to need two bottles of iron gall ink: one to write with, and one to use as a long-term restorative shampoo.









