Anyone know how to read the writing in the Mandarin logo in Iron Man 3?

[Aeschines]

I’m curious if it’s real Manchu writing or just bullshit. Thanks!

[Kimstu]

Before anyone can read it they will first need to find a decent picture of it. This image shows the symbol the OP is talking about, but it looks pretty fuzzy to me: of course, I don’t read Chinese at all, so there’s that.

[Reply]

Where is the writing? That image just shows a bunch of rings with vertical lines through them.

ETA: Nevermind. Sorry, I didn’t realize Mandarin was a character instead of the language. And here’s a better picture.

[Trinopus]

I’m no expert by any means, but that doesn’t look like Chinese. It looks like fantasy made-up squiggles. Chinese ideograms are made to be printed by a paintbrush, and the individual strokes are usually just strokes: smooth swooshes, sort of like elongated teardrops. A brush-user wouldn’t have any convenient way to make those little spurs and barbs and thingies.

[Reply]

Maybe not modern-day Chinese, but like the OP said it does resemble the Manchu script. In Iron Man terms, Mandarin isn’t a language but a villain whose logo looks like it was written in Manchu.

[Ludovic]

@Reply

ETA: Nevermind. Sorry, I didn’t realize Mandarin was a character instead of the language. And here’s a better picture.

@Reply

Maybe not modern-day Chinese, but like the OP said it does resemble the Manchu script. In Iron Man terms, Mandarin isn’t a language but a villain whose logo looks like it was written in Manchu.

Oh, a character as in a fictional person. I looked at the logo and was like “well, actually there are many characters in it!”

[John_Mace]

@Trinopus

I’m no expert by any means, but that doesn’t look like Chinese.

That’s because “Chinese” and “Manchu” aren’t the same thing. The OP was at fault for conflating Manchu with Mandarin. As already noted, the Manchu script is noticeably different from Chinese writing.

[Reply]

I don’t know if this makes it clearer or just more confusing, but in other Iron Man works, the “Makluan rings” were written in actual Chinese, but an ancient/decorative/religious variant of it (I think).

Those symbols were taken from the system of “Ba gua”, apparently a symbolic representation of Taoist cosmology. The fire ring is the Ba gua symbol for “Sky”, the energy ring is that of “Earth”, the water ring is the symbol for “Water”, etc.

In the new movie, those symbols were discarded and new ones used. I’m not sure if they’re still related.

[Jragon]

@John_Mace

That’s because “Chinese” and “Manchu” aren’t the same thing. The OP was at fault for conflating Manchu with Mandarin. As already noted, the Manchu script is noticeably different from Chinese writing.

He didn’t conflate them, that’s the logo for a character called The Mandarin.

[Reply]

So using this English-Manchu dictionary and this alphabet for its non-roman script, it doesn’t seem like common elements (fire, earth) are in the ten rings. Real Manchu has a lot more squiggly round things and random dots. The characters in the logo have strong vertical, near-to-centerline emphases.

Maybe it’s just stylized calligraphy, maybe it’s something else altogether. I tried the same translations with the traditional Mongolian script, but it still seemed off. On another board somebody thought it was Persian, but that doesn’t look right either. I dunno.

ETA: Maybe you can ask this guy, whose teacher apparently spent much of his life compiling a comprehensive English-Manchu dictionary. There’s the finished dictionary sitting on his grave.

[Reply]

I emailed that man and he said “It looks to me as though someone roughly traced some Manchu or Mongol script with minimal precision.” He told me to email another Manchu specialist. I will report back if he responds.

[Trinopus]

@John_Mace

That’s because “Chinese” and “Manchu” aren’t the same thing. The OP was at fault for conflating Manchu with Mandarin. As already noted, the Manchu script is noticeably different from Chinese writing.

How is this script usually produced? It doesn’t look like it would be easy to make with brush-strokes! (That’s what led me way astray.)

(I’m told that the serifs in the Roman alphabet were originally to make it easier to chisel the letters into stone! Is this true, or am I falling for another old UL?)

[Reply]

@Trinopus

(I’m told that the serifs in the Roman alphabet were originally to make it easier to chisel the letters into stone! Is this true, or am I falling for another old UL?)

Wikipedia outlines the “controversy”:

The explanation proposed by Father Edward Catich in his 1968 book The Origin of the Serif is now broadly but not universally accepted: the Roman letter outlines were first painted onto stone, and the stone carvers followed the brush marks which flared at stroke ends and corners, creating serifs. Another theory is that serifs were devised to neaten the ends of lines as they were chiseled into stone.[5][6][7]

^ Samara, Timothy (2004). Typography workbook: a real-world guide to using type in graphic design. Rockport Publishers. p. 240. ISBN 978-1-59253-081-6.
^ Goldberg, Rob (2000). Digital Typography: Practical Advice for Getting the Type You Want When You Want It. Windsor Professional Information. p. 264. ISBN 978-1-893190-05-4.
^ The Linotype Bulletin: 265. January–February 1921 The Linotype Bulletin - Google Books |url= missing title (help). Retrieved 26 October 2011.

[Reply]

@Reply

I emailed that man and he said “It looks to me as though someone roughly traced some Manchu or Mongol script with minimal precision.” He told me to email another Manchu specialist. I will report back if he responds.

I ended up writing to a former editor of a journal of Manchu studies. He said in an email back:

No, I don’t think it is Manchu. Looks more like Mongolian (or an attempt at Mongolian) to me. There isn’t a single Manchu word I recognize from it. None of the “dots and circles” typical of Manchu script are there. And a several of the figures look to have a final “l” or an “s” (e.g. the ones at one o’clock and ten o’clock for “l” and at eleven o’clock for “s”), which are not possible in Manchu words.

As above, to my untrained eye the script doesn’t look like Mongolian either, but I’m no expert.

[Aeschines]

So is our conclusion that it’s just fake writing that imitates Manch/Mongolian or some similar vertical script?

[Reply]

@Aeschines

So is our conclusion that it’s just fake writing that imitates Manch/Mongolian or some similar vertical script?

Well, it’s probably not Manchu or Mongolian. Omniglot.com has a bunch of other scripts if you want to keep looking. Or maybe just email the movie’s prop maker?

[John_Mace]

@Trinopus

How is this script usually produced? It doesn’t look like it would be easy to make with brush-strokes! (That’s what led me way astray.)

(I’m told that the serifs in the Roman alphabet were originally to make it easier to chisel the letters into stone! Is this true, or am I falling for another old UL?)

I don’t know for sure, but I think brush stroke. I don’t see the problem any problem with that technique.

[theMongol]

Do you have large sized picture? Yesterday I watched the movie and was shocked to see scripts resembling our Mongolian scripts.

Anyway, someone just post large size picture, so that I can take a look.

BTW, Manchus started using Mongolian scripts after Mongolia became part of their state.

[Leo_Bloom]

@Reply

I ended up writing to a former editor of a journal of Manchu studies. He said in an email back:

[snip]

As above, to my untrained eye the script doesn’t look like Mongolian either, but I’m no expert.

For the win. I like it when in a reply somebody personally contacts a pro.

<Shoves scholar up against wall. “Wiki says this is true. Is it?!! IS IT?!!”>

[ebeb85MGL]

f*ck off dis chinese. it is mongolian traditional script. “Tsagaan urt , nogoon urt , ulaan urt etc.” It means White Long , green long , red long etc…