> DavidGan1x
> I seem to remember seeing the transcripts for the Baroque Cycle were all handwritten. Are you still handwriting your books and if so, what advantages do you think it has over using a computer?
> NealStephenson
> Mostly handwritten, yes. It's slower, and so each sentence spends longer in the buffer before it gets written out, so first draft quality is higher.
I write my books, my journal and my zettelkasten with an Azerty mechanical typewriter.
I think I do really understand his philosophy…
If that's indeed what he's doing, it might be like writing pseudo-code and then going back and translating it into the programming language medium of choice. The benefit of writing in a journal is that it's probably easier to do on a sunny day at the beach in the sand than it would be on a laptop or tablet. Also maybe seeing old ideas crossed out on paper helps later when looking back over it to get you into the same headspace.
Sometimes we over-optimize for aspect of a task (such as getting ideas down quick) in a way that's detrimental to the process itself when we step back and look at the whole.
And the simple fact I posted the previous comment is the proof I’m procrastinating my next chapter ;-)
I suspect this is what they are talk about.
Yet I still find myself reaching for my legal notepad to scrawl out rough ideas.
It seems like a matter of picking the right tool for the job.
I am inspired by the fact that this man is able to use the correct tool for the particular job.
I am also inspired by the self-awareness required to make such a call.
And I liked that I had a physical artifact afterwards, especially since the writing had a bit of visual personality while computer text does not.
But it takes forever to write by hand. I'd spend like 8+ hours a week just writing that journal, and I'd often have a cramped hand afterwards. Still did it that way for a couple years, though. And I still like referring to them from time to time.
Probably goes without saying I might be talking out of my arse here but it's interesting to think about.
I changed countries and career paths about 8 years ago, and for a while, over the next 3 roles, it involved large amounts of note-taking. Tens of pages of notes per day, every day, for weeks at a time.
I switched to using fountain pens too, and found it hugely increased what you call "handwriting endurance". I can write for an hour or more with a fountain pen, without pain or difficulty or cramping.
(I am in my mid-50s now, and this was in my late 40s. That means that part of the time at school we had to use fountain pens. So it was a switch back for me.)
With ballpoint pens, be they cheap and nasty or premium high-quality ones, you can press hard. This tires the hands and causes cramps.
You can't do that with a fountain pen. It damages the nib. You have to press lightly on the paper and that makes you write better. It also encourages good cursive letter forms, which evolved for a sharp nib on paper, which snags in certain directions, also less of a problem for ballpoints.
I mostly use Pilot V-Pen disposable fountain pens. They are exceptionally reliable, the whole barrel is full of ink so they last much longer than a cartridge or reservoir pen, and they don't leak even in a backpack that's treated roughly.
I recommend trying them. It's worth the effort. It works.
Ballpoints, however fancy, are only for scribbling quick notes. A proper pen results in better writing, and writing better.
https://wordcounter.net/blog/2017/12/04/103207_the-daily-wor...
Michael Crichton at 10,000 words is a crazy outlier.
so yes, anyone doing this must have good discipline in handwriting
Most of us can type a lot faster than we can write with a pencil. I doubt it is just the difference in speed (and I think Stephenson is simplifying here, not really saying that is the only difference), but that's part of it.
A sentence written by hand has often been drafted, considered, and revised before it actually makes it to the paper. Whereas for somebody who can type, the first sentence that hits the page is often literally the first draft of it, as originally thought.
(I still cannot imagine writing an entire novel this way myself, though...)
If instead he'd said something like: "I just like the feel of pen to paper." Or "I've tried both pen/paper and a computer and there's something about using a computer that just doesn't work for me." that would make more sense. But this notion of a 'buffer' just doesn't.
Perhaps "deluding" was too pejorative; I'll grant that.
If you write a sentence per hour and a sentence per second, they will have different quality levels.
Either way, in the absence of very compelling counter evidence, I'll defer to the expert opinion of the author on how their brain works
Edit: the other salient concept which comes to mind is Marshall McLuhan's idea that "the medium is the message." McLuhan definitely believed that if you go and say something over broadcast media vs e.g. printed matter, what you say comes out very differently. Both the content and interpretation are influenced by the medium. He would probably agree there is a difference between typing and handwriting, too.
Edit2: there's at least one study which has found that handwriting engages more of the brain than typing does: https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/new-study-suggests-handwriting...
It isn't something you have to do, but then it's clearly not something you do.