Electrology History

Hair Removal Methods Professional Electrolysis
#41

Clareblend

When I met Marge Smith (late 1970s) the company was called "Clare, Inc., named after her mother who called herself “Miss Clare,” and had a practice and electrology school in Minneapolis.

Marge had worked in the dental field and her original operatory designs for electrologists have yet to be matched: stunningly beautiful and perfect for our needs. (Just too expensive for us “cheapos.”) I worked with Marge for a year, developing her first blend machine.

This is the second-generation of the machine I designed: layout, meters etc. (I gave away the original unit but will try to get a photo if it). I convinced Marge to “go blend” because blend was “hot” at the time, and also change the name of the company to “Clareblend.”

Oddly, the original logo on the “Clare-matic” (the machine she was making at the time) was a German WWI Iron Cross … I never understood that connection. I drew the “new” logo you see … and it’s still in use! I still have my original drawing. (The little thermolysis “Clare-matic” was the first epilator to use “transistors.” Remember those?)

So, here it is … this one has never been used and probably still works. The Clareblend machines go on forever.

#42

Sudonna: Compuderm

Pictured below is a thermolysis unit produced by “Sudonna” (New Jersey, USA). I met the family that manufactured this unit at a convention in the 1980s put on by Rose Mineni (Rose had a school in Modesto, CA).

“Sudonna” was derived from the names of their two daughters: Sue and Donna. Of interest is the light weight of this machine: 6.5 pounds. Imagine that the old “dinosaur” units weighed in at nearly 30 pounds!

Notice the name “Compuderm?” Being in the 1980s, the computer was fast-becoming the new wonder of the age. Everything possible (whether actual or not) tried to get “computer” into the name of the thing.

A later model (a little fiberglass unit) was called “the firecracker” by folks in the industry … because it was known to be “a hot machine” (whatever that means?)

As these machines are “talking to me,” I see a pattern emerging. Key words were used to both describe the unit and to help advertise the “modernity” of the machine. Here’s a run-down of key words that were used during each period:

1920s - 1940s: Radio, Radiation, and Automatic.

1950s - 1980: Transistorized, solid state, “state-of-the-art.”

1980s - present day: Computerized, digital, LED (light emitting diode).

(Note: Presently, there is a person touting a “new methodology” of electrolysis and uses “LED” in the trade name. In what is being presented, well, there is no LED in the system at all … it just sounds good?)

#43

Is it true (or not) that carbon items are porous so less likely to be cleaned and disinfected quickly?

#44

Hi Barbara … I love your pic, by the way: especially the ear rings! Very sexy!

To answer your question … I don’t know. However, I think these are graphite. These are rock hard and don’t seem as porous as my metal units. My metal grounding units (and roller) turn into a damned mess in a very short time. I have to sand them out to get the corrosion off. Also, if you don’t sand them down, they quickly become less conductive. (I use 220 wet/dry sand paper … 320 for my tweezers.)

These “ancient” accessories have zero corrosion and look brand new. These I’m keeping and adapting to my new unit (I’m adapting the foot switches too … these old timers cannot be matched by anything in use today.)

#45

R.A. Fischer

This one is a Pandora’s box. If you notice, this is the exact same cabinet and faceplate as the “Armenta/Juniper & Norris” unit. They have attached a metal plate over the other company name. So, which came first? I don’t know. But manufacturers often make epilators for other companies.

I do know that R.A. Fischer was Hinkel’s biggest competition and was the first to challenge the St. Pierre patent (on the blend). In later years, Hinkel and Fischer worked together … right up until both companies quit. The Fischer Company was the first to offer a “computerized” machine called the “Compublend.” Many are still in use.

Opening the drawer was the real surprise. The unit still had the “after-treatment” creams that were popular at the time. Notice too that besides the “grounding plates” on the machine, there was also a pad for the DC “return.”

The BIG surprise for me was the tiny jar labeled “sterilizer!” In those long-ago days, used needles were placed in a jar filled with QUATS or other disinfectant and that was supposed to be a “sterilizer.” Actually, State regulations required this jar to be labeled “sterilizer.”

In the jar were a few two-piece needles and some original Hinkel tapered needles … I found the one I like for tiny hairs. I wonder if I could …


#46

" I wonder if I could…"

I could…send me one so I can measure it and I’ll send it back.

#47

Here’s a photo of my first blend machine, the Hinkel Model D. I hated the way it looked but ergonomically I still prefer several aspects of the design. This basic cabinet was used from the 1940s until the early 1980s! (I dressed-up my original unit with teak and leather padding … gave that one away too, but I’m hoping to get a photo).

The Model D had a separate “air desensitizer” that actually worked. The “fan-pump” looked like a tiny jet engine and was so powerful, if you didn’t have the needle secured in the needle-holder, the needle would fly-out and impale itself in the wall! The newer ones (e.g., the Clareblend) used air pumps from an aquarium supply … and were worthless.

The second photo is the first design-change in all those years and “yours truly” had a big part in it. First, Hinkel being a ridiculously modest guy, never put his name on his machines. I convinced him to do it, so this became the “AR Hinkel Electro-blend.”

Since I had a lot of experience making fiberglass kayaks (called Bonobot; "I’m not so modest), we decided to do the thing in fiberglass. What you see here (second photo) is the result. Actually, it’s a compromise: I wanted a much more “space-age” look. Remember the “Space Age?” The UC-1 also had a “computer function” … I didn’t like it. but, you know … it was the “Computer Age?”

I think we are moving into the “Robot Age,” so I’m wondering who will be the first to have the “Robotic Epilator?”

I drew the face panel, and my long-time surfer friend Merv Larson ended up making the tool and mold … and made all the “UC-1” cabinets. Merv had been on the US Olympic team (flat-water kayaking, K-1 and K-2 and got a “silver”). and was a champion surfer (he invented the surf ski).

I found Merv in an old video … and yes, he lived in a van at the time (lots of surfers did). I’m pretty sure that’s me in the video’s first few frames, in FEAR as usual … I mostly did beautiful 'WIPE-OUTS!" The place in the video is “Rincon” Santa Barbara. I was so near-sighted I could never see a wave until it was too late … then “splat.” (Hairs I COULD see!)

Anyway, this little unit became known as the “bread box,” because it looks like one! I wanted the unit to have a unique look … it did. However, I think I “missed the mark” on this design … later ones were much nicer. (Again, this is a new unit that still works!)


#48

I just remembered a funny anecdote.

During Merv’s time at the Mexico Olympics, the US and Hungarian kayak teams got super friendly. So, they decided to do a “special operations” against the Soviet team.

At 2:00 AM they conspired, snuck into the “Russian camp” and stole the Soviet Union’s flag: the big one! They never got caught. Merv gave me a Hungarian kayak team shirt (my mother was Hungarian) and I wore the thing for years when I went kayaking. I think he still has the big USSR flag too.

I have 3 more machines to show … and then I will “shut the hell up” … FINALLY!

#49

I wonder how many logos you’ve created over the years. I remember you mentioned once that you designed the current logo for the AEA. And this brings me to another politically incorrect question, yes, I am very inquisitive today, how are charged this type of work? by a single payment which assigns all rights of use to the contractor (in this case the association)? or by copyrighted whenever the logo is printed on one of the diplomas or certificates awarded by the AEA such as CPE, etc?

You better not answer me, I can guess … completely free?

#50

Hey Jossie … I found a footswitch with the original Clare, Inc., logo!

Maybe it’s not exactly an “Iron Cross,” but I remember the first time I saw it, I had an almost uncontrollable urge to stand at attention and go “marching.” I didn’t do it because I couldn’t find my Pickelhaube.

To answer your question Jossie … no, I never charge anything for anything I do (I never will): logo design, proof-reading, articles or machine design … zero. All efforts are to benefit the “group.” It’s probably my old Communist background I suppose? (Or is that Fascist? I never seem to get that right! Americans never do. Who’s the enemy at the moment?)

Usually the “group” doesn’t want me either, because I don’t have the right “credential!” And I ain’t gettin’ it neither!

#51

Michael - This thread has been an amazing read!

You mentioned that telangiectasia treatment being taught in schools early on. I have a book titled Electricity in Facial Blemishes by Plym. S. Hayes. The inside cover has the following imprinted: “Electricity and the Methods of Its Employment in Removing Superfluous Hair and Other Facial Blemishes.” The copyright of the book is 1880.

There is a section in the book on telangiectasia removal which goes on to say,“Except the removal of superfluous hair, there is probably no other form of blemish in which the use of electrolysis is so efficacious.” The section is only a few paragraphs long, but clearly the procedure was well known and being taught.

This has me wondering where the first schools were for electrolysis - the Wishire school is of course legend, but what preceded it?

Thanks for sharing all the wonderful photos and insights!

  • Liz in Whittier.
1 Like
#52

YES! Emendia … tele treatment is as old as “hair removal” itself, and WAS an integral part of the practice of electrologists! (I have a curriculum from 1925 using HF).

Somewhere, along the way, “we” got disconnected. In our field today, there is general and widespread fear associated with the procedure (although I have sold more than 6,000 telangiectasia books? I wonder who’s doing it, and who’s buying these books?)

The association (gosh I seem to be on a rant here … NOT at all) … well, the association for decades shunned the procedure. In fact I was ordered not to speak about this to anyone (even privately) at association conventions.

Historically, such loss of “information” is not all that unusual. People often discover OLD information that seems new … a “re-discovery” if you will (e.g., when Europe re-discovered ancient Greek philosophy … thanks to Arab translations.)

One favorite story (you just KNEW I had one!). Years ago when Romano Scavo (Holland) was building his first blend machines, he phoned me up. He said he had invented a new revolutionary electrolysis “modality” that will be the best every. It goes like this: You use the (high) thermolysis but you do this with “split-second” timing. In this way the process goes super-FAST and the person feels less pain.

My God, I almost fell over with this totally NEW concept!

#53

Instantron model 355. I know little about this unit. It has a very nice look to it. A heavy metal box. Automatic -thermolysis as you can see.

#54

Another Mogilner unit, made in Los Angeles (not sure of the year; probably 1950s). Of interest is that the HF output and timing were both on one control. I would assume that as you turned up the dial, the HF output got stronger and the timing less. The access door at the top gets you into the workings of the machine (not much in there). My guess is that this would not have been a popular unit: people want to control both timing and intensity independently? (I do anyway.)

The last machine is coming up … “le plat de resistance!”

#55

This unit is probably the oldest; perhaps pre-1900s (?). Amazingly the multiple needle arm is still perfect. Made of chrome and steel, there is not one mark on it, and the arms hold the selected position with total stability (ball-joint sockets). There is no “electronic mechanism” to the unit, because the top panel sat atop a (wood) box … and IN the box was a BATTERY! And, that’s all:

Here’s the front panel:

And here’s the backside of the panel. There is nothing to this unit except two wires to connect to the battery … and a meter and a “pot” of some sort (probably a rheostat?):

This is the end of the show, and now I will be packing up all these units and taking them to Phoenix for the new “electrolysis museum.” I hope that Patsy Kirby will allow the museum to use her AMAZING and beautiful “History of Electrology” (Power Point) so that everybody can see the entire history before examining the units. (Patsy’s presentation is the best ever … and everybody should have an opportunity to see it … )

#56

I’m not sure of this, but this unit could have been called “wall plate?” I have seen the term in very old texts. Indeed, the arm, once attached, will easily go into a proper position for such mounting. I suppose the battery could have been in the wall … and the “plate” mounted to the wall itself. I will look into this.

#57

Okay … final one, I promise! This is the first machine I designed for Marge Smith (I still have my original drawings). Weighing in at a mere 4 pounds, this had a very unique appearance, and I still like it a lot! At the time, people said it was “too small to be impressive.” The unit still works; my niece in Missouri is fiddling with it at the moment.


#58

Why promise? This is a very interesting thread.

#59

Please don’t stop posting pictures of the epilators. I’ve hoped someone would do this! (I don’t see a Sudonna Ferrie - I think that’s what it was.)

PS: All you have to do to make any epilator more impressive is to add some big knobs. At least that is what one of our colleagues said several years ago.

#60

Thanks for your kind comments. As far as more photos? Well, “That’s all folks!”

When I get over to Phoenix, I will photograph the dozen or so (antique) epilators that Maria has in her new “electrolysis museum.”

Maria is working with Larry “Lorenzo” Kunze, and these old units were his mother’s (also had a school). I don’t know if folks know this, but Larry’s mother was a relative of Henry St. Pierre (the “blend” inventor).

Small world!

1 Like