TWO sparkling Royal No. 10s?

I know what you're thinking. "What kind of asshole would not be satisfied with the beautiful 1924 Royal No. 10 (H-885159) on the left? What sort of jerkoff demands the additional 1933 Royal No. 10 (H-1686090) on the right?" Sure, it's fair. The first one is about as good as it gets for 1924. The other is about as good as it gets for 1933. I'd really be showing off if I were simply putting the picture of the two of them together to point out that I was blessed with both.

But you see, the older one will have a new home soon. My grandmother used it to write a number of children's books, a copy of each of which can be found in the Library of Congress. It will soon make its way to my cousin's house, as a wedding present (congratulate him, everyone!). He is a writer, and he needs the positive energy of this thing far more than I do. I hope it can help his books be as successful as hers.

But we can not produce top quality nonsense with just any typewriting machine. The Royal KMM is sturdy and reliable, but this is not exactly a one-typewriter household (and unfortunately the rest of our machines currently need more care than I can provide). Each machine produces a different style of gibberish, and we can't be without multiple mechanical influences. Enter the new No. 10. Lavish, you say? No, I got it for an absolute song. That I will brag about.