What Makes 'good' Handwriting?

[caliken]

http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd289/caliken_2007/Itseemswrong630.jpg

 

Ken

Edited April 11, 2012 by caliken

[Mickey]

As long as Ken is willing to do it, it's probably time for me to show my daily handwriting. (Sorry for the crooked photo.)

 

 

If anyone's interested, the paper is Clairefontaine (French ruled, I use a lot of it), the ink is McCaffery IG, the holder is by Michael Sull, and the nib an Esterbrook 358. And this is really how I write at my desk. My on the road writing is usually not so nice.

Edited April 11, 2012 by Mickey

[Celerity-dad]

I was working up the courage to add a sample of my own handwriting but I'm having doubts now that I've seen the above examples. If anything I'll post a sample showing where I started and now. Maybe it will encourage others to keep going.

[Celerity-dad]

Here's where I am currently. I feel like my progress has slowed down so I'm going to print out some slant guides and use some French ruled paper. Maintaining consistent size and slant are high on my list of improvements.

Mark

[Mickey]

Here's where I am currently. I feel like my progress has slowed down so I'm going to print out some slant guides and use some French ruled paper. Maintaining consistent size and slant are high on my list of improvements.

Mark

 

Looks pretty good to me. I certainly had no trouble reading it, which couldn't be said about my writing at one point in my life.

[caliken]

As long as Ken is willing to do it, it's probably time for me to show my daily handwriting. (Sorry for the crooked photo.)

 

 

If anyone's interested, the paper is Clairefontaine (French ruled, I use a lot of it), the ink is McCaffery IG, the holder is by Michael Sull, and the nib an Esterbrook 358. And this is really how I write at my desk. My on the road writing is usually not so nice.

Attractive handwriting, Mickey, showing an interesting mix of influences.

 

Ken

[caliken]

I feel like my progress has slowed down so I'm going to print out some slant guides and use some French ruled paper. Maintaining consistent size and slant are high on my list of improvements.

Mark

Nice writing, Mark. I'm a great believer in the use of slope lines when practicing lettering.

 

Ken

[tdzb36]

I support Mr caliken's viewpoint .in the past I do not like use paper with slope lines to practice Copperplate ,I find the effect of practice is not good,Recently I try to use paper with slope lines,I hope I can imporve my calligraphy !

[Bhavna]

As long as Ken is willing to do it, it's probably time for me to show my daily handwriting. (Sorry for the crooked photo.)

 

 

If anyone's interested, the paper is Clairefontaine (French ruled, I use a lot of it), the ink is McCaffery IG, the holder is by Michael Sull, and the nib an Esterbrook 358. And this is really how I write at my desk. My on the road writing is usually not so nice.

 

Mickey, your handwriting is simply exquisite! Thank you for sharing!

 

Bhavna

[Stompie]

http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj229/Popsjill/pens/IMAG0155.jpg

[caliken]

http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj229/Popsjill/pens/IMAG0155.jpg

Thank you, Stompie - it's nice to be appreciated!

 

Your second example "Ken, your work...." is really attractive. I think that your writing looks best with a finer, narrower nib, as the shading is less pronounced and the lettering gains finesse as a result.

 

The more I look at it, the more I like it. It is nicely balanced, by which I mean that all the letters belong naturally to the same family. It's very easy to read and the degree of flourishing with the looped ascenders is just right IMO being tasteful, and not in the least intrusive.

 

If I were you, I'd stay with this style as it is distinctive, great to look at and your own.

 

Ken

Edited April 23, 2012 by caliken

[PENitent]

I think that readability is first and foremost the strength of good handwriting. Second is the way it Shows the personality of the

 

writer. Consistent slant and letter shape is nice but any printer can provide that..

[caliken]

I think that readability is first and foremost the strength of good handwriting. Second is the way it Shows the personality of the writer. Consistent slant and letter shape is nice but any printer can provide that..

 

Firstly, without the attributes of "consistent slant" and "letter shape", the readability of handwriting is often severely compromised, and that's why I placed those factors of first importance.

 

Handwriting can be individual and unmistakably the work of a particular person, but whether or not the handwriting of an individual "shows the personality of the writer" is perpetually argued over, as it can never be proven. I tend to believe that this is a bit of a myth and no more than a subject for light- hearted discussion.

 

Having studied and practiced Calligraphy for 58 years, I defy anyone to discern any personal traits from my handwriting.

 

Ken

Edited April 23, 2012 by caliken

[idazle]

Having studied and practiced Calligraphy for 58 years, I defy anyone to discern any personal traits from my handwriting.

 

In my humble opinion, precisely this might be a shortcoming of caligraphy for personal communication. The art of writing taken to its ultimate frontier perhaps come at the price of blurring the personality of the writer. I would like to improve my penmanship to make it more legible and nice to see and read. However I want my family and friends still to recognise me through my handwriting.

 

Carlos

Edited April 23, 2012 by idazle

[Mickey]

 

Having studied and practiced Calligraphy for 58 years, I defy anyone to discern any personal traits from my handwriting.

 

Ken

 

Steady hand?

[Mickey]

I think that readability is first and foremost the strength of good handwriting. Second is the way it Shows the personality of the

 

writer. Consistent slant and letter shape is nice but any printer can provide that..

 

One of the first things to suffer with inconsistent slant and letter form IS readability.

 

As for personality: only printers lack personality, except in a metaphorical sense (e.g., the printer only worked when it felt like it.) Handwriting is always personal and one might suggest that inconsistent slant and letter forms convey conceit, a disrespect for the reader (i.e., the writer could not be bothered to provide the most readable text possible) or immaturity (i.e., the writer has not YET learned how to write well).

[fncll]

Having studied and practiced Calligraphy for 58 years, I defy anyone to discern any personal traits from my handwriting.

 

I'm not sure what you mean here. If by traits you mean personality traits and the like, that's not an argument I want to get into. But I don't think anyone here has said as much. The idea of "personality" in this thread, like in many of the crafty arts, isn't about distinguishing individual personality traits, but distinguishing one person's work from another.

 

If you mean traits that distinguish your handwriting from others who have become very skilled in the art of calligraphy, then it *precisely* illustrates the aesthetic divide. Because if that's what you meant, I couldn't imagine a worse insult to someone's handwriting.

[fncll]

One of the first things to suffer with inconsistent slant and letter form IS readability.

 

As for personality: only printers lack personality, except in a metaphorical sense (e.g., the printer only worked when it felt like it.) Handwriting is always personal and one might suggest that inconsistent slant and letter forms convey conceit, a disrespect for the reader (i.e., the writer could not be bothered to provide the most readable text possible) or immaturity (i.e., the writer has not YET learned how to write well).

 

Readability is a red herring. Everyone writing here has access to email and/or printers, so if one is *really* worried about readability in a performance sense, they'd use that. Performance is a spectrum, and past a rather modest level, it's not a significant difference-maker.

 

All handwriting may be personal in one sense, but it is not all individualized. It's pretty clear that's what most mean by "personality" in handwriting, or any other craft. There is a significant distinction.

 

One might suggest that trying to make their handwriting looks like thousands of other peoples' handwriting is a waste of time, time better spent on the content of the letter and, besides, perhaps indicative of a rather immature understanding of aesthetics in the first place.

 

OR one might suggest: to each their own...no reason to backhandedly impugn the character of those who don't see eye-to-eye with you.

 

Personally, the latter seems more productive.

[Mickey]

One of the first things to suffer with inconsistent slant and letter form IS readability.

 

As for personality: only printers lack personality, except in a metaphorical sense (e.g., the printer only worked when it felt like it.) Handwriting is always personal and one might suggest that inconsistent slant and letter forms convey conceit, a disrespect for the reader (i.e., the writer could not be bothered to provide the most readable text possible) or immaturity (i.e., the writer has not YET learned how to write well).

 

Readability is a red herring. Everyone writing here has access to email and/or printers, so if one is *really* worried about readability in a performance sense, they'd use that. Performance is a spectrum, and past a rather modest level, it's not a significant difference-maker.

 

All handwriting may be personal in one sense, but it is not all individualized. It's pretty clear that's what most mean by "personality" in handwriting, or any other craft. There is a significant distinction.

 

One might suggest that trying to make their handwriting looks like thousands of other peoples' handwriting is a waste of time, time better spent on the content of the letter and, besides, perhaps indicative of a rather immature understanding of aesthetics in the first place.

 

OR one might suggest: to each their own...no reason to backhandedly impugn the character of those who don't see eye-to-eye with you.

 

Personally, the latter seems more productive.

 

Notice the forum in which we are discussing this. Look at the thread title. The availability of printers and various other means of communication is THE red herring (or pickled herring, cherry herring or Albert Herring, if you prefer). Readability is front and center.

 

As for individualizing handwriting, some of it is unavoidable. To go beyond what is unavoidable AND retain readability requires more knowledge of lettering than most of us here have. (BTW, you are arguing / discussing this question with someone who spent his professional life in the arts, so, regarding aesthetics, don't try to teach your cranky old granny how to suck eggs.)

 

Here's a question for you, how is trying to master a skill 'trying to make their handwriting...' ? You seem to misunderstand why one learns fundamentals. Picasso didn't suddenly start painting Guernica. His style(s) is (are) based on a mastery of fundamentals. His deviation from those fundamentals is knowledge-based. It is informed choice made for artistic reasons, not from an impulse solely of the moment or a need simply to be unique. The same is true for Igor Stravinsky, Jane Austen (you might find her juvenilia illuminating), or anyone aspiring to excellence, whatever the field.

 

There was no backhanding being done. We, as a society, are tolerant of the errors of youth. Children need to learn how to write and their early efforts not unfairly criticized. This constitutes the exception provided for immaturity. As for what sloppy handwriting conveys, or what I believe it conveys, this is opinion, and, as it was not pointed at the other poster, is not subject to your criticism, except as to the quality or validity of the opinion itself.

[PENitent]

Firstly, without the attributes of "consistent slant" and "letter shape", the readability of handwriting is often severely compromised, and that's why I placed those factors of first importance.

 

Handwriting can be individual and unmistakably the work of a particular person, but whether or not the handwriting of an individual "shows the personality of the writer" is perpetually argued over, as it can never be proven. I tend to believe that this is a bit of a myth and no more than a subject for light- hearted discussion.

 

Having studied and practiced Calligraphy for 58 years, I defy anyone to discern any personal traits from my handwriting.

 

Ken

In response to your first comment above, writing can be done without consistent slant or letter shape and still be readable. This is a problem with trying to fit absolutes onto a qualitative attribute, you can find 'variable' writing that is horrid and I can find variable writing that is beautiful. There are many calligraphic alphabets that are not consistent but are still readable and beautiful.

 

 

In response to your second comment above, I did not wish to imply that you could pull a person's personality from their writing but rather that the author's writing shows emotion. I want to see variations in the writing when they are spending time thinking over a phrase or quickly dashing off a few lines. I want to feel that a living person wrote the words that's what makes good handwriting to me, a letter from heart to hand.

 

 

I understand consistency is a function of skill and hard work but a computer printer can do the very same thing. I guess what I am trying to say is I understand that for calligraphic purposes an exact letter slant and identically formed letters is what is required. I believe that good handwriting doesn't have to have these as long as it is readable.