How the Ballpoint Pen Killed Cursive
theatlantic.com
theatlantic.com
I don't strictly use the letterforms or all the best practices of the Palmer method—see the article for a link—but using a Palmer book as a guide, I managed to teach myself to write with a relaxed grip and no movement in the fingers or wrist, and I can go for hours now and walk away with no more discomfort than the stiffness of sitting without relief.
It is hard to write like this using most ballpoints because you do need to exert more force to get a consistent line out of the things. You don't need a fountain or dip pen, however—just a soft-leaded pencil (try an art supply shop), a good rollerball pen, or some gel pens. None of these write as effortlessly as a fountain pen, but neither do they require the kind of cramp-inducing force that a Bic pen does.
I've read mid-century materials on this topic before. My sense is that this isn't a new argument so much as a forgotten one.
Writing in a fancy style is fine for calligraphers making wedding invitations or whatever, but is a poor model for teaching children or for everyday use for most people.
Italic (aka chancery cursive), a script of renaissance Italy, is a much better model.
Here’s a great page targeted at teaching children to write, with lots of exercises: http://briem.net
Also see http://luc.devroye.org/Briem1985-IcelandicMethod.pdf and http://66.147.242.192/~operinan/8/2/205.html
Palmer descends from, but is assuredly not, Spencerian. Nor is it in any sense of the word fancy, except perhaps in comparison to blockletter print. It is a business hand designed for practical, quick, and legible business communications. It is not a coincidence that Palmer books begin with posture and movement exercises before students are even to lift a pen. It really is meant for everyday, injury-free use.
My point is just that Palmer’s script isn’t practical/legible in comparison to italic. It’s filled with lots of little flourishes, makes it easy to write letters in a confusable way, and is very difficult for children to learn. The capital letters in particular are ridiculous. For someone highly trained, it can be fast, but it’s not inherently faster than other styles. It only seemed “professional” because it was the trendy style at the time.
As a curriculum/pedagogy, teachers using the Palmer method focused on drilling and discipline, the same “do it correctly or I’ll hit you” style common to instruction in the 19th and early 20th centuries.
Features of handwriting technique like using muscles in the arm to move the whole hand in preference to fixing the hand and mostly using finger motions can be applied to any writing style.
Where early 20th century extended into at least the 1960s at one Catholic grade school I could name :-)
All fine hand control (fencing, kitchen knife work, writing, eating with chopsticks, soldering, knitting, playing a piano, ...) uses a combination of whole-forearm motion, wrist motion, and finger motion. The human brain/body are incredibly good at translating intended action into precisely choreographed movements combining multiple muscles. The question is how much of each type of motion to use; the more the work can be offloaded to the whole arm, and the more relaxed the wrist and fingers are, the more comfortable it is to do something for a long period of time. The fingers still do quite a bit of fine motion, regardless.
But my comment doesn’t even advocate any particular grip or hand movement technique; all I said is that those bits of advice from the Palmer school, under discussion by the top-of-thread poster, are applicable across various letter-shape styles. As far as I can tell that’s a completely uncontroversial statement.
Agreed with one exception: capital A. The Spencerian A looks elegant while the Palmerian A looks like 3/4 of someone's bottom.
Everything else is a bit of a shrug in my book.
Modern systems aim for legibility, at speed.
Anyone wanting to see different systems used during 20th century might be interested in this book: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Handwriting-Twentieth-Century-Rosema...
After college, my handwriting (Zaner-Bloser, as taught in elementary school) had deteriorated into a completely illegible scrawl. I taught myself to write again, using Arrighi's Operina and Briem's commentary. If I were homeschooling my children, I'd probably use either Getty-Dubay or Barchowsky.
The Palmer Method began to fall out of popularity in the 1950s and was eventually supplanted by the Zaner-Bloser method, which sought to teach children manuscript before teaching them cursive, in order to provide them with a means of written expression as soon as possible, and thus develop writing skills.[6] The D'Nealian method, introduced in 1978, sought to address problems raised by the Zaner-Bloser method, returning to a more cursive style. The Palmer company stopped publishing in the 1980s.
D'Nealian was one of the final blows to nibbed pens in the U.S., even wiping them out of most Catholic schools: it was ballpoint from then on, almost without question. With longhand in the workplace largely supplanted by typewriters (and soon by personal computers), the public at large moved toward writing implements that were "easier to pick up." After all, few people have need for an instrument whose finickiness is made up for only by ease of use in long sittings. Ballpoints are among the easiest writing tools to care for; you basically keep them out of the wash. No ink refilling, no cleaning out converters between colors and brands of ink, no ink drying out after two weeks in the drawer, no worry of the dreaded "baby bottom nib" of new fountain pens. Buy a Bic, get on with life. There's much to recommend them. If your writing is purely utilitarian and miscellaneous—lists, thank-you notes, reminders, memos, etc.—you probably don't want to bother with anything more complicated.
As it was taught to me, D'Nealian seemed to be designed for easy entry, plain and simple. Many other methods tend to concentrate on technique early, quite apart from letter formation. In D'Nealian, students are taught the proper manner in which to hold a pen, but little else. And ballpoint pens don't really allow for the old "proper" grips that are still often taught, as other commenters have touched on. You have to exert force downward onto the page to get a ballpoint to write, while the old, loose tripod grip that is still recommended was designed for nibs that only needed to glance the page. So D'Nealian is associated in the minds of many students with cramping exertion, and forcing the pen into practice.
Anyway, as soon as you can hold a pen, you start tracing and copying letters. You basically "draw" them; the letter is taught, not the movement. That's about all I can remember.
I'm not in education, so my recommendation of one over another shouldn't be sought. But I would easily believe that there were great things to say about a system that gets children writing as soon as possible. This is particularly true if the manner in which we make our letters by hand will have no bearing on our future prospects. Which, of course, it almost certainly won't.
Personally, I think D'Nealian looks childish. And if you aren't writing with a flowing technique, I see little point for joining all letters in a word. Not that cursive has always been written with streamlined, flowing, efficient, "full-arm" movement, as in the Palmer method and some of its relations. But from my point of view, why waste the extra ink or graphite needed to join letters just to encourage cramp?
I don't think D'Nealian killed cursive; Palmer or similar methodologies, which are hellish to learn if you go by the book, would likely have done even worse. More or less everything that we deal with today is in manuscript, unless your apartment complex happens to have cursive lettering on its awning or something, in the hopes of looking nice. Or maybe if you're digging through old relatives' things. So it's natural for children not to care about it, and even resent the drills needed to learn it.
I think the argument that ballpoints killed cursive is naturally overstated. If ballpoints hadn't become popular around the same time that typewriters did, there may well still be need of different writing implements and quick cursive in the workplace. But certainly ballpoints do make cursive much more difficult.
"We must find ways of holding modern pens that will enable us to write without pain. …We also need to encourage efficient letters suited to modern pens."
Can you describe the way you hold your pen when writing and perhaps comment on the way you form your letters? I'm interested as I find the ubiquitous Bic impossible for more than a couple of sides.
"most of us need a flexible way of writing—fast, almost a scribble for ourselves to read, and progressively slower and more legible for other purposes."
I have a suspicion that we mainly use pens/paper for the writing fast bits and the purposes for which slower writing was needed are now achieved using our keyboards.
My personal test for a pen of any kind is to hold it lightly between thumb and index finger, and then drag the pen down a page so that the only force pressing the nib/ball/tip onto the paper is the pen's own weight. If it leaves a line then I can use it without hand pain for fairly long periods. If it does not, then I'll use it mainly for shopping lists and post-it notes. Most but not all fountain pens pass that test as do some of the gel pens that produce wider lines such as the Uniball signos. Felt pens e.g. Sharpie fine points can pass the test as well!
As mentioned in a sibling comment to this, italic writing was taught in most UK schools for most of the 1960s onwards.
My daily driver is currently a Monteverde Invincia Deluxe Stainless Steel ($65), which looks fantastic and is a great performer. I highly recommend to that anyone with large hands, because it's definitely not small. I also recommend the Pilot Metropolitan (~$12) [1] and the Waterman Phileas (~$50) all of which I have used extensively for class notes.
If I don't have one of my FPs for whatever reason, then I have been known to go for smooth "roller ball" pens as well - they use more lubricated ink than standard ball points and require less pressure, so they generally feel like mediocre fountain pens.
This: http://www.amazon.com/Write-Now-Complete-Self-teaching-Handw... seems to be updated.
http://www.gouletpens.com/Platinum-Preppy-Fountain-Pen/c/280
It's a great fountain pen for four bucks, I use them exclusively now (and don't worry too much about losing them, because four bucks!!).
I am partial to the Parker rollerball refills - I use a Parker Chinese Laque Ambre - but do not want the inconvenience of a fountain pen.
I believe a rollerball is like the Nespresso to the fountain pen's espresso. Slightly worse - but much better than ball point pens.
But the best part that I like about rollerballs is how you can get an expensive experience in a cheap pen. For example Mont Blanc refills can be hacked to fit a cheap G2 [2]
[1] http://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/topic/241755-which-p...
[2] http://www.instructables.com/id/Save-$200-in-2-minutes-and-h...
I do like the solid weight and feel of my fountain pens though, which is often lacking in rollerballs. The weight of the pen is the only thing that holds it against the paper the way I write, so light pens can be annoying.
If you're curious, one of the cheaper ($3-$4) disposable fountain pens (I think it was Pilot?) were a great introduction. When I first used one (on nice paper that didn't suck up all the ink into ugliness), it was amazing, even though I know there are better ones out there.
My daily carry is a Pilot Vanishing Point (EF or a custom-ground 0.6mm italic) and a Sailor Sapporo Mini (hard fine). Those are about $175 and $200 retail, respectively.
Note that I didn't pay anywhere near that, as I've been buying, trading, repairing, and selling pens since shortly after I started. In total, I'm slightly in the black at the moment.
I recommend Reddit's /r/fountainpens - there is an IRC server listed in the sidebar, and it's surprisingly active.
The only problem is that, in business meetings people tend to assume you're trying to make some kind of hipster statement.
Everywhere I go I'm usually the only one using a foutain pen; what a shame.
The weird handwriting of Americans certainly has to do with how they're taught, not what they use.
I have three kids that are currently learning to write (aged 6, 7 and 10) and a great deal of time is spent forming nice, cursive letters (copying lines of frequent letter pairs to lean how to join them properly and nicely for example).
I'm not saying this is good or bad (I like cursive and am happy my kids are learning it, but would like they would also learn to touch type, which isn't taught in school), but I am saying that you write how you learned to write...
I was around 10 when erasers first appeared, and they were strictly forbidden during all my school years, because they tended to make a big mess (or a hole) in the paper. We were told to strike errors properly, with a ruler.
Today it's true that they are permitted, to my amazement.
Among my children's teachers, some recommend fountain pens, some say they dislike it, but mostly kids can use what they like best.
Since, I barely write - I type everything.
Edit: also, this wasn't long ago. Finished school in 2001.
Bvvvvvvvvvvvv.... (the sound that thing made)
What children learn in Germany for at least a few decades now looks like the following: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Vereinfachte_Ausgangssch...
From what I understand, the cursive script that was taught in US schools was much more complicated with lots of little flourishes. The simplified cursive script seems a lot more practical to me, and I wonder if that is a factor in the the decline of cursive writing. The negative reactions to cursive writing I've read on the internet from people in the US seemed a lot stronger than anything I've ever heard from Germans.
Having to lift the pen for each letter seems so tedious that I don't understand how Americans can write such long texts in print.
The only case where we don't is to fill administrative forms, as they force you to write in print for legibility.
For what it's worth I still try to use it whenever I write by hand (which is rare in the first place), but often revert to print because I can't usually decipher my cursive a day later.
Given the amount of typing that today's children will do I think it's a very good idea to teach them something that stands a chance of not being replaced by something more primitive as soon as they leave school (or much earlier, as in the case of my age group). The days of artfully written letters written on expensive paper won't come back any time soon.
My grandparents have letters that are written in this script, and I’ve seen it used in official documents from around 1900. I fell in love with this script and try my best and learning it currently. Just looking at it will make it obvious that it’s pretty impossible to write with a ballpoint pen.
Still, it's moot - as the article author said - because I haven't had to handwrite more than my own name in the last 6 months.
AmE BrE
=========== ===========
Italic Cursive Calligraphy
Connected ??? Handwriting
Unconnected Print What you do on forms...I use them for note taking at meetings and whatnot. You do want a fairly fine/tight paper to write on though - the same as any other liquid-ink pen.
For paper, try the bamboo-based paper from Staples. :)
Second, it really does make writing fun. I hated writing — my handwriting is messy, it's slow, and it's not as easy as typing. As the article argues, a good fountain pen makes it much, and in my experience much more enjoyable.
Third, it doesn't need to be expensive. Get a Lamy Safari (EF), a Lamy converter and a bottle of Noodlers ink. I also love my Faber Castell Loom[2] (it's the smoothest pen I own), and I carry around a Kaweco Al-Sport[3] everywhere (it's the perfect pocket pen).
[1] http://www.epa.gov/superfund/students/clas_act/haz-ed/ff06.p... [2] http://www.gouletpens.com/faber-castell-loom-metallic-orange... [3] http://www.jetpens.com/Kaweco-AL-Sport-Fountain-Pen-Fine-Nib...
I like this comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2501152 – a partial quotation:
> Almost all US schools have standardized on forms of looped cursive (e.g. Parker Penmanship, Zaner-Bloser) -- a set of letterforms designed not for handwriting, but for the movable type printing press! Looped cursive was made to be attractive with the fewest unique joins possible so that printers needed to stock fewer pieces for their movable type presses. Looped cursive is slower, less legible, and more difficult to learn than forms of writing actually made to be written (such as cursive italic).
But as a lefty, I feel like the proper experience of using them is pretty much off limits to me.
I could have pretty decent handwriting for about an hour and then fatigue simply set it and most of my writing is an illegible mess. Not surprisingly, when I was young and we were graded on handwriting my grades were pretty poor.
Cursive didn't help much either as the continuous strokes simply meant I made more of a mess all over myself.
I was an okay sketch artist as a kid, so I had good pen control, just could never really adapt myself to the written word.
Lots of lefties go through all kinds of contortions to improve some of the situation, you'll notice Obama reaches around where he's writing so he can pull on the pen. I tried that for a while but the back and shoulder cramps were pretty spectacularly killer.
https://traceyricksfoster.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/obama-...
Now I work for a big tech company and still carry a notebook + fountain pen + blotting paper to meetings, it amuses my coworkers.
Even worse, for my own personal note books and random writing I use steno pads and write from the bottom to the top of a page. My wife hates it because when I ask her to read something I've been working on she has a lot of trouble reading it. But I've been doing it for so long it's natural for me. If I need to share something with people I can write "normally" or type it out. But personal use my system works for me.
The main pens I've been using these days are disposable fountain pens [1]. They write great and somehow the ink rarely smudges, though more often than with the Jetstreams. But overall I find it more pleasant to write with fountain pens.
[1] http://legacy.mos.org/sln/Leonardo/LeonardoRighttoLeft.html
At the moment I am mostly using Artline 200 Fine 0.4mm pens. These are not ballpoints and the think ink lines dry fast, so the text is hard to smudge. They are not without issue though. As the nibs are only crimped into place and writing with your left hand means you are pushing down and to the right; the nibs slowly get pushed up into the pen body. So I have to replace them when the nib disappears which is before the ink runs out.
If I am forced to use ballpoints for any lengthy text I end up rotating the paper close to 90 degrees and writing at an extreme angle to get the pen to drag rather than push across the page.
If so, there must be a lot of products and techniques to accommodate their needs, which could help you.
[1]: http://www.gouletpens.com/noodlers-bernanke-black-3oz-bottle...
The biggest thing back then was that I was left handed and the teachers forced me to write right handed. My mother ended up getting me 'permission' to write left handed and I have been happily ever since ;<).
I don't remember any problems. We were very well-behaved.
If you prefer something larger,the Jinhao 159 is a clone of the Montblanc Meisterstück 149 http://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/topic/216230-jinhao-... and is under $6 on ebay
I think knowing cursive is still useful, too, because if you do know how to use ligatures to join letters you can write MUCH faster than if you have to write in print. As an engineer, I prefer smallcaps when I need someone else to read my handwriting, but if it's just for my own consumption (task lists, notes, etc) it's faux* cursive 99% of the time.
* faux because it's really just joining letters and filling the missing letter spaces with zig zaggy curlies ... which have no bearing on readability, per this: http://www.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/people/matt.davis/cmabridge/
Note: Some cursive is much easier to read than others
The Paper Mate medium point felt tip pen is my favorite writing tool. It provides a good-looking and effortless stroke and you can buy them pretty much anywhere.
I suppose the mass move away from cursive writing started with the printing press. By simplifying the symbols we gained a powerful tool to spread the ideas they convey. This has just become more true with the computer which, much like the printing press, has a much easier time with distinct disconnected symbols.
I believe it's more important to learn how to write and express your ideas using all available technologies then spending time learning the particulars of one.
The hammer doesn't need to be beautiful to build a beautiful house it needs to be efficient. Writing does not need to be elegant to convey a beautiful message.
This was the case for Chinese, in which a good handwriting was highly regarded. As far as I know, there are no studies to prove or disprove the claim. It was true for me personally and for my classmates. I could execute many handwriting forms in pencils and in fountain pens easily while extremely hard, if ever possible, in ballpoints. After using ballpoints for a pretty long period, I couldn't write as well even if I picked up my fountain pens again. It had to take some time and some writing to get it back.
Under the discipline of a schoolteacher, I could force myself to write "superb cursive handwriting", but when writing for speed and legibility, I adapt to the limitations of my tools.
While technically true, that fountain pens will use more ink, keep in mind that (a) ink is cheap, (b) refilling is easy, and (c) some[1] pens have a larger ink capacity.
[1] http://asapens.in/eshop/fountain-pen/gama-ebonite-pens/gama-...
How about writing by hand ON a computer?
For me is totally stupid to teach kids to type on a keyboard, when in the present and near future you could use other faster and better means for writing, like this speech recognition I am using now or stenotype.
The other day I saw a friend using a new prototype of a new digital stenotype on a maker space and I was sold instantly. This is the future.
But children need to learn how to draw, and train their hands in precise manipulation. If you lose handwriting training when you are kid you also lose the ability of doing precise work with your hands as your brain will prune the neural connections with your hand as you don't use it.
You can do that on a computer. Today we have affordable galaxy notes. I use an expensive Cinqiq, that will become much more affordable in the future. Training kids looking at the rear mirror makes no sense to me.
If an essay exam final was truly 3 hours, rather than twice the length of a 1 hour midterm, I came out in agony.
I personally never liked writing on paper, it was ugly and time-consuming; I would never be able to express myself on paper: I'll compress the meaning away or just quit halfway through.
Similarly, I've found that I can retain the content of electronic documents more easily if I type them out in a text editor. Sometimes I just delete the text, other times I retain it as a more portable version of the content.
Most members of my family think it's strange that I work with paper so much (and continue to buy most of my books in paper form), given that I've made a living writing software and websites for almost 20 years. I just think that, even with computers in the house from a young age, I was taught to use my brain through paper, and every alternative they've come up with to date has been, at best, a half-assed imitation.
And since I'm homeschooled I've been typing most of my answers to books on a computer (for 4-5 years).
I find myself loathing to explain something with a "simple" chart that can take 5 minutes to draw by hand but far more on a computer.
... and then take a digital photo. Which is the process I've adopted. This is a hard problem to solve with the clumsy digital tools we have at our disposal at the moment. Probably not with this generation of input.