Who writes in cursive?

[kjervin]

I had a resident send in a money order today (rent payment). What was odd was that he filled out the entire thing in cursive. I had just asked my wife last night how many people she knew who wrote primarily in cursive. She said about three. I write about half and half in real life and print variations only at work. My question is this: Do you run across many adults who write primarily in cursive (not a variant of italic) and if nobody write in cursive once they get out of school, why bother to teach it at all? It just strikes me odd that I just recently realized I know precious few people (mostly women) who write in cursive beyond their signatures.

Kj

Edited January 19, 2005 by kjervin

[Cam]

In this sense, do you just mean "joined-up writing"? If so, that's how I normally write. I suppose, thinking about it, not many other people do ...

 

Wow, never noticed that before!!!

[kjervin]

At some point, I think about 3rd grade (here in NC) we were to join our letters in a style called American Cursive I think ther are other variants (DeNealian or soemthing similar, Zaner Bloser, Peterson, etc) but it is probably the same as joined up writing. I remember we we not alllowed to print anymore at a certain point and I also remember it was sold to us as being faster. I find I tend to get lost in all the loops, especially with m's versus n's. I just want to keep making humps. I guess I wonder how much of it took. I hardly ever see cursive anymore. I hope all that effort was not just to teach us how to sign our names!

Kj

[Leslie J.]

I always write in cursive, specifically Palmer method. It was ingrained into my being in primary school. I notice most adults do not use cursive, they print. <_<

[wimg]

Hi kjervin,

 

Virtually everybody over here writes in cursive (roundhand), whenever they don't use a keyboard, obviously.

 

But then, everybody gets taught to write with a fountain pen at some stage in their lives, normally at primary school. Of course, most people move on to BPs or RBs in secondary school, but quite a few remain faithful to fountain pens, or rediscover them .

 

Oh, over here is the Netherlands.

 

Kind regards,

Wim

[georgem]

I was taught to write cursive in grade school. Hmmm! Let me rephrase that.

 

Cursive writing was taught in the school which I attended as a child; however, it was a skill that I did not master to the satisfaction of the teachers.

 

As an adult, I printed, used a typewriter, and of late, keyboard.

 

Just recently, I became fascinated with the Cateneo Cursivo hand of James Pickering, and have been attempting to emulate it. Improvement has been great, but I have far, far to go.

[KendallJ]

I hate cursive (The english call it copperplate I believe, or script. I get the 2 mixed up). About 2 years ago a spent time working on my penmanship (needed a good hand to go with my pens!) and now I used primarily italic or a joined italic. I know a few people who use it, but mostly from HS in the 50's and 60's. I was taught it, but handwriting was not a focus in 70's grammar schools it seems so I never got good at it.

[Kate Gladstone]

Looking at adults (people over 18) whose handwritings I've seen, only about 10% - 15% write in what most USA schools would call "cursive."

 

(By the way, today's [January 19, 2005] NEW YORK TIMES Education Section article on handwriting, covering a colleague and me, misrepresented us as endorsing the "cursive" way of writing: not to mention other misrepresentations the article contained. The colleague - Nan Jay Barchowsky at http://www.BFHhandwriting.com - and I myself use, favor, and generally teach Italic: which does not fit USA schools' usual definitions of "cursive" though it fits the paleographic definition of cursive as running/rapid writing, with joins but not necessarily totally joined.)

 

NOTE to anyone who uses "cursive" for a signature "just because we have to" - as far as I can find (and I've checked with lawyers) no law in the USA or elsewhere requires signatures to use a particular writing-style or letter-formation. Legally, "your signature" just means whatever you habitually write - and done however you habitually write it - for purposes such as showing your identity, your assent to a contract, etc.

Notions that "you must write your name in 'cursive' to make it legally valid" apparently started with elementary-school teachers, as a convenient "motivational device" (to put it charitably) that the teacher could use to persuade kids to change their handwriting into this "cursive" style after having just worked hard for a couple of years on "print-writing."

Anyone wishing to change his/her official signature can (in the USA/UK/other places I know about) do this easily by having the bank give him/her an additional signature-card to fill out for the bank account: put your new signature on the card, after you've become comfortable writing it, but ask the bank to keep the old card in your file along with the new one (because you may possibly have a check outstanding somewhere). Banks will do this, particularly if you explain and demonstrate the reason (a good way to "spread the word" that adults *can* and *do* improve their handwriting), because banks also have to do this sort of thing if the handwriting changes for other reasons: e.g., if a signature deteriorates after loss of vision, after amputation of the dominant arm/hand, after a stroke, etc.

[kjervin]

Wim,

Maybe it is just a US thing then. The odd part is that we never used fountain pens in school. We went from pencils to ballpoints. ( we used the papermate erasable ink pens for a while). I would have loved to have used a FP in middle school, maybe I would still write more cursive today, you know what they say, "Een goed begin is 't halve werk!" Still, seems odd to be such a difference, huh?

Kj

[Keith with a capital K]

I have to write in cursive as I cannot print to save my life.

 

Most of the people I work with also write in cursive.

[ednerdtheonly]

I myself am a highschooler, and use cursive often especially during essay tests and note taking where speed is crucial. No other student that I know, or teacher even, uses cursive.

 

By the way, I'm new to penmanship. Is there a good site where I can learn the basics? I'm interested in different daily usage handwriting styles.

 

Ed

[KCat]

I think I write in a weird cursive-italic hybrid. Because I've never been able to really train myself out of the horrible handwriting I started with in grade school but I prefer italic forms. So it ends up being a bit of both most of the time. Joined italic but with some typical cursive habits (loops on f's for example.) Depends on which pen I'm using. With an edged nib of any sort I am more likely to keep italic forms consistent. With a flex nib, I write this odd upright cursive thing. I'll have to post pics to make sense of it.

 

we were certainly taught cursive. I'm 40 and age might have something to do with what we are taught in the US. It was a requirement. And I had points taken off of my work for many years because of legibility (lack thereof.) My husband always prints, except for his signature, but it is because of his training as an engineer in the 70s. He had to take drafting/mechanical drawing classes and very small, very clear print is required. I'll have to scan a pic of his writing too - sometimes it's hard to tell if it's off a printer or from his hand.

 

we too went straight from crayons and pencils, to ballpoint.

 

I do think it's important to teach some form of handwriting beyond printing. I think italic would be the best, or at least some form that incorporates italic techniques because I think a clean, simple italic form is much easier to read. Especially in long pieces.

 

So.. what does one do when a document asks you to "print your name" and then "sign your name" - implying that the two are different. Since I am in the habit of signing in my old, ugly style, it's always a distinction but i've seen plenty of folks who's printing and signature looked very similar so I don't think it's that big a deal.

 

I like the idea of changing my signature to reflect an improvement in my handwriting. But I suppose I'll have to wait until after the house purchase as I just signed a gazillion papers Tuesday and initialed them (why do we have to sign *and* initial the same page?) and used my ugly scrawling "cursive" signature.

[Gerry]

I'd agree that both age and location appear to determine the degree cursive is used. I use cursive, and in work and private correspondence most of the people that I am acquainted with do as well. But that's Canadian experience, and among more mature folk.

 

I *think* my children use it (speaks volumes about the letters we get from them <_< ) but considering they live in town and we're connected by email - not surprising...)

 

Gerry

[Keith with a capital K]

So I take it that, for many, this whole cursive thing is hard to do?

 

I can render some pretty nice italic forms but it takes work while writing in cursive is much like breathing... I use three different cursive forms through the day depending on what I'm writing.

 

Perhaps it is a Canadian thing where cursive was stressed (and graded) when I was in school and still stressed where my kids go to school.

 

On the other hand, I have met people who cannot read cursive very well as the letter froms are too different from the printing or typed text they are used to reading.

 

And then there are people I work with who should just stick to typing or printing as their attempts at cursive, although noble, are incomprehensible.

[KCat]

On the other hand, I have met people who cannot read cursive very well as the letter froms are too different from the printing or typed text they are used to reading.

my niece is very bright, very artistic, and loves to write and draw.

 

But at age 9+ her writing remains very rudimentary and she has a lot of trouble reading cursive. I suspect this is largely due to where she is living (Let's just say that certain parts of the Southwest are not high on policy maker's lists when it comes to education.) Part may be her motivation though - she likes to play with the calligraphy pens I gave her and can execute many of the forms quite well, but a ballpoint in her hand results in writing I can barely read. Very large, unbalanced lettering. By 9, my teachers were reining me in severely. However, she can write some basic Japanese characters very well and is learning to draw in the "Manga" style. She is addicted to all things Japanese.

 

The cool thing - Manga requires the use of dip pens and calligraphy ink. so it encourages further effort on her part to use her FPs.

[Keith with a capital K]

I encourage my boys to write in cursive and they actually work fairly hard to emulate my "pretty for a guy's" handwriting and my 7 year old daughter now attempts to write a little in cursive.

 

Being able to write legible cursive script is a great skill to have as I do not believe any other form can offer the same flow and speed that is possible... it is especially beneficial when one has to take mountains of notes on a regular basis.

 

Plus... nice cursive script is very pretty to look at.

[Moondrop]

My mother does. She's also got great handwriting. I think my sister also writes mostly, if not all, cursive. I, on the other hand, use an odd hybrid of print and cursive that's hard for even me to read sometimes. And yet we both went to Catholic school right up through high school.

[KendallJ]

Being able to write legible cursive script is a great skill to have as I do not believe any other form can offer the same flow and speed that is possible... it is especially beneficial when one has to take mountains of notes on a regular basis.

hmmm. the Sassoon book makes the case that a joined italic is one of hte fastest forms of writing. I tend to buy the argument, and think cursive is too loopy (causing visual clutter), and too requiring of constant joining, whereas italic is cleaner, and just as fast. Cursives strike me as more flourishy, ornate common hands that developed after printing press was developed.

 

My only empirical argument is that italic hands were developed in an age when there was no printing press, and books were individually copied by hand, and hence speed, efficiency, and legibiliy of extreme importance. (maybe James or Kate can confirm).

 

As you can see I bought the argument.

 

I also don't think cursive is the best pedagogical (one to learn at a young age) hand, and italic again wins out. It's non-relation to printing makes it essentially a different hand to learn at young age. Forming cursive letter shapes has difficult to see relation to printing, and thus the joins don't make sense either. Teaching un-joined italic, followed by joining would be much easier for younger minds to absorb (and why Sasoon and others favors it for teaching reasons). Too much emphasis placed in today's handwriting education on drawing letterforms, and not on the integration of rythm, and basic flow. Transitioning from unjoined italic (i.e. printing) to joined italic is a great way to teach that, rather than just teaching kids to redraw a new letterset (cursive) which is the way they learn it now.

Edited January 20, 2005 by KendallJ

[mchristi]

They started teaching us "Palmer Method" cursive in 3rd grade. At some point that year, it then became required to use it in all school work. I think the idea was to give people practice and reinforce it. Not a bad pedagogical idea, but the teachers ended up fighting those who didn't like to do it and those who wanted to use their own style. Cursive was required for the rest of elementary school. I hated it. I wasn't good at it. I was slow. As soon as it was no longer required, I switched back to printing. My handwriting, whatever form I used, was terrible. But you had a halfway decent chance to read my printing. The only cursive I do is for my signature, and that's become more a bunch of squiggles than any actual letters (especially after the first two letters in the last name).

 

I actually think their insistence at following the exemplars above the chalk board and in our writing books was counter productive. I always got frustrated trying to make the letters look like that. I couldn't. Other students were frustrated because they had good handwriting and were developing their own style and would get told not to do that. It would have been much better to work on each of us writing legibly in our own styles. It probably would have helped me not to feel bound to those particular letter forms. At any rate, it would have been much less frustrating.

 

In adulthood my handwriting has changed again, especially since I took up the fountain pen. It's gotten more legible, and naturally evolved into a mixture of printing, italic, and a little bit of that cursive. But, really, I can't say I at all benefited from those writing lessons in elementary school. It would have been just fine had they taught us to print, and left it at there. It certainly would have saved me some frustration. It also would have enabled us to spend more time on more worthwhile and important and interesting things. (You can't tell I have an opinion on the subject, can you? )

 

Mark C.

Edited January 21, 2005 by mchristi

[KendallJ]

Yeah, I can remember having to follow letterform model, but not really worrying about rythym or temp. I can remember my mom telling me that they would have her make rows of parralel lines or loopy circles. We never had to do any of that, and I think my handwriting suffered.

 

I worked a lot with the sasoon book, and they had several exercises like that and never trying to "draw" letterforms.