The Write Event

A more in-depth look at Copybook

I am so happy to finally get some images and samples to show you. (I guess I need a live-in tech advisor!)From this point on you will have them them to use for reference.

Note the copybook (c.b.) examples in the previous post on December 21, 2003.

There is a strong similarity between the two systems we are looking at here: Palmer and Zaner-Bloser. Unfortunately, here you are not seeing either system written in sentences. So, there are no connected words to show written in strictly copybook. Speaking of c.b.: Connectives between letters are not specifically taught in school. Ostensibly, they are implied because each letter is shown with an approach stroke and an exit stroke. Since many of the exit strokes swoop upward or rightward and the entrance strokes start at the baseline it would be virtually impossible to teach them anyway. They would not connect naturally. So, each writer, even when modeling copybook, had to adopt a natural personal way of forming connectives. It is truly a unique aspect of writing for each of us. That is a very important thing to consider when analzying writing because connectives reveal a lot about personality.

If you were to trace over the copybook letters with a pencil (a good idea to do with any handwriting you are working on) you would get a feel for the writing. You would see that copybook is very slow writing to execute. So, if you were a fast thinker in the 4th grade, when you learned cursive, is it any wonder that being expected to slow down to write like the model was very uncomfortable? If you flunked handwriting class it just shows that you were developing individuality early.

The characteristics of the copybook models: slow, connected, perfect-looking, rigid, basically roundish in form, all ending strokes go rightward or up, minor embellishment, no printed forms, very regular letter size (middle zone about 1/8" or 3 mm) and exact uniform spacing. Note that pressure is moderate and slant is very regular and slightly rightward. Also, d and t stems are not quite as tall as the other ascending letters.

Now look at your own handwriting. Do you now write anything close to the way copybook looks? I am going to guess—"No!"

Copybook examples: Palmer & Zaner-Bloser

Palmer method: commonly taught from early part of the 20 century through 1960

Zaner-Bloser method: one of the systems taught in schools after 1960 or so

The evolution of Copybook becomes your style

It is very difficult for many writers to follow the copybook model taught in school. Structured "penmanship" classes appear to be getting less common these days, depending. Of course, it is a useful discipline to learn by a model to follow because nobody wakes up at age 7 and knows how to write. We need guidance to learn something as complex as writing skills. The trouble has come from school systems imposing the method as the way it must be done. I have heard a lot of war stories from people who experienced being rapped on the knuckles for failing to do it like the chart. Many also tell how they were forced to change from naturally writing left-handed to unnaturally writing right-handed. That could not have been pleasant.

However, when you first learned how to write, left on your own, your natural pattern was formed and became automatic. Writing eventually became something you do without thinking how, much like walking.
It is a habit.

There are roughly four things that happen once you are used to performing the act of writing and develop your own style: (all of them can appear in the same handwriting!)

1. You conform quite closely to the copybook model you learned in the first place. Such writers still will show individual characteristics, even though the writing resembles copybook. There are always deviations from it. For example, such writers tend to remain a conforming people. Seems "nice" and compliant. Maybe so and maybe not as there can be quiet traits of inner defiance, stubbornness, even resentment stewing. Depends what traits show up but overall (seeming to be) comforming is the norm.

2. You revert to printing. Most of us learn to print first. Some start as printers in the early grades of school, then learn cursive and use it and later take up printing again due to the vocation they select or it starts to feel right. When printing is the preferred style the personality seeks clarity, simplicity and likes the way it looks better than the way they write cursive. Printers are usually direct communicators, often do not like small talk about nothingnesses (Unless it's a hot topic for them, like sports.) Listen closely and you may notice that printers talk more about their feelings than they feel their feelings. Rather, they may intellectualize them. Many printers find intimate emotional connections difficult. Block printers fall into the category of middle-zone predominant writers (check the posting on "zones") and are interested in what is happening now. Printers can be creative people. Some writers do print-script, which is a mixture, just as the name suggests. There are many styles of printing so for our purposes here we will not be talking a lot about this style of writing.

3. You can embellish more. Such writers feel that a plain styte is just not quite finished looking or feeling to them. They just have to add more. A flourish, a wavy line, extras. The effect can range from tasteful design, suggesting an appreciation of line, to outrightly garish and ostentacious, which is a play to be noticed—or else. Usually if writers want to be noticed they put themselves 'out there' and show it by writing large, even though it is not embellished.

4. You find ways to strip the writing down. Chief indication is that the writer leaves off approach strokes, that is, the entrance strokes of letters, the lead-ins. An easy example to visualize: the letter t. When started in the upper zone as a straight stroke that descends straight to the baseline, you have a direct stroke, which is an efficient use of time and energy. Mark this as a trait defined as DIRECTNESS. Makes sense, doesn't it? We get the understanding of this as a trait because it deviates from copybook cursive. We learn to make a t with an approach stroke that is retraced: after ascending it then comes down as a retraced stroke. Doing it as a straight line makes it more efficient; it is shorter and easier. The mind unconsciously figured that out; the writer doesn't plan it.

So, when this trait starts showing up in a young person's writing we have the hint of moving toward maturity, if we can call that a destination. (Do we ever arrive?) Surely though, it is thinking maturity. Direct writers, especially if it is a very strong trait, get right into things with no fanfare. They don't tolerate delay very well and have trouble with long-winded stories, especially if forced to listen to them. Ask an indirect person (lots of lead-ins, implying they need warm-up time—the longer the lead-in the more time they need ) "How was your weekend?" and you may get the whole, detailed story. Ask a direct person the same question and you are likely to get, "Great!"

When directness is pronounced (rating say, 8-10 on a scale of 0-10)—and there are few traits to squelch it (like fears) or inhibit it from being expressed out loud (be assured the writer is still thinking it) you have bluntness. Aiding and abetting such a tendency would be strong emotional responsiveness, heavy pressure, (we will talk about these soon) impatience and poor impulse control (the latter is an evaluated tendency.) The writer would be impelled to 'shoot from the hip' unless very reticent.

I don't think I mentioned before that well over 100 basic personality traits come out in handwriting. Plus, dozens of evaluated traits, which are combinations of basic traits. It is like mixing paint: you have two separate colors and then you mix them and get a third color. Example: humor+sarcasm=wit. Wit has a bite to it; the sarcasm tacked onto to humor creates that effect. (Later, you will read my lecture on sarcasm; this use is the only redeeming use of such energy and that is also questionable if it hurts someone. ;))

Handwriting Analysis--101--copybook

Let's start with a consideration of how we learn to write in the first place. You probably learned to scribble a little when you got a pencil or crayon in your hand for the first time. Then, as you got older somebody tried to show you how to make letters. Then words. Maybe "dog" and then your name.

School years meant learning to print and it no doubt felt awkward at first. When I went to school we started with printing and then in about the third grade they changed the rules and cursive writing was the program for penmanship class. It came easy to me. I loved the writing experience. Not true for a lot of other kids who struggled through, hating every minute of the drill. Did you have that experience?

Nowadays, there are many systems taught in school. But the main thing to remember is that as soon as you got comfortable with writing you developed your own style. Certain preferences show up immediately. They are not conscious choices; they come about because of your mind-hand connection. Your nervous system and your mind cause your individual patterns to develop very early and that's what you write.

Copybook writing is the model taught in school. You have to start somewhere so copybook is like a recipe for handwriting. There are basically four things that can happen after first being schooled in copybook writing. They can even all appear in the same handwriting.

First, you may continue to write pretty much in the same style of copybook. Deviations from the c.b. "right" way will still show up as soon as you put your mark on the page. You may write larger or smaller, your spacing may be closer or farther apart, your pressure on the page may be much lighter or darker. So, even though you write what looks like the copybook model, it won't be strictly according to the book. It can be identified as your writing. Your individual habits will be there.

The second possible thing is to embellish the writing with added and unnecessary strokes. For example, endings might be longer; swirls may show up, maybe extra flourishes all over or just in certain letters. It might be subtlely and tastefully done or might end up looking like attention-getting salutes. (This type of writing can be common to entertainers and someone who likes being in the public eye. That is not cast in stone.) One example was Marilyn Monroe's showy writing. The more famous she got the more she embellished her writing. She started out writing in a "prim, vertical hand" according to her sister, who wrote a book about "Norma Jean" a.k.a. Marilyn.

The third thing is to cut down on any excessive strokes. One way this shows is to leave off any possible approach strokes from words. To illustrate: Think of the letter t.

Even on the computer screen we can see this point. Imagine this letter "t" as a handwritten cursive t. In this case the stem of the letter comes right down straight to the baseline (whether there is an actual baseline or an imaginary one because of being unlined paper.)
When you make a stroke like that one there is no ascending stroke first; it comes straight down. And there can be no loop because it is one stroke downward. Writers who prefer to do that will have other indications in their writing of taking mental shortcuts. In fact, the trait has an identifying name called "directness." When you see a handwriting with lots of direct strokes you are looking into the mind of a person who likes to get to the point quickly. And who wishes you would too.

The fourth thing is to revert to printing by choice, if indeed you ever stopped doing it. More and more young people print these days. Some systems even teach it in lieu of cursive writing.

Now, take a look at some handwriting and see if you can pick out some of these characteristics.