In 2013, the nation was stunned by the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. The George Zimmerman trial brought to light concerns that have always been a present but unspoken dark shadow upon American culture. Although violence, gun control, and race took center stage, education was also called to the witness stand. Most people looked on in horror as an American who had attended school since kindergarten in Miami spoke in barely literate slang, and was unable to testify regarding a piece of evidence written in cursive. Like so many other Americans being turned out from school systems that no longer teach valuable developmental skills, such as cursive, she was stereotyped and dismissed. And while Rachel Jeantel was criticized for being ignorant and having poor character and personality, she is just one of the hundreds of Rachel Jeantels being turned out by an education system in dire need of a closer look.
In the mid 2000’s The College Board reported that students who wrote in cursive earned better scores based on an increased ability to express themselves. The positive correlation between the ability to write cursive and an aptitude for creative expression begs an investigation of the ways in which learning cursive may impact intelligence, personality and character.
Since 2001, there have been drastic changes in public school classroom curricula across the country. The advent of educational mandates such as No Child Left Behind and Common Core have prioritized standardized testing and heralded it as the platform to conduct effective classroom teaching. In states like New Jersey, for example, teachers’ pay and advancement is tied to student outcomes on state tests. With livelihoods at stake, teachers are sticking to the “block” script, teaching only what is required. In the case of cursive, because it is not on the test, it is no longer taught.
There have been copious debates arguing either to maintain or defame the value of teaching cursive. However, when looking at the topic from a historical perspective, it is clear to see the value of cursive as relating directly to the creative process throughout time. Although he came along at the tail end of the rebirth, Thomas Eakins, one of the most important artists in American art history, is said to be deeply influenced by the fluidity and gracefulness of cursive in his own art. Handwriting has enraptured and inspired the mind of scholars and artists a like. Not so unlike Thomas Eakins, every individual who has triumphed the hours of cursive practice has earned a right of passage into their own expression of written art. Not only does cursive define points of generational, personal and cultural import, the way pottery or architecture might, it also serves as a window to the soul, rendering insight about character and personality throughout time.
An example of how generations have capitalized on the expressiveness of script is marked by how it has changed over time. Cursive as a recognized form separate from block script took shape during China’s Han Dynasty as an efficient way for clerics to quickly produce rough drafts. The transition to cursive similar to what we use today, began with a right forward slant and connecting ligatures or lines, which developed out of the calligraphy style of Eastern Traditions. In addition to its Eastern influences, modern cursive of the West owes its existence to the renaissance of the 14th century. During this time a new generation enraptured by education and the quest to understand humanity was born. The change in style from block to cursive emerged as a humanistic rebellion against the coldness of culture and feeling prevalent in the Gothic period. As people began to shift their beliefs, they also began to shift the shape and style of their letters to create a new reality; one that better reflected their un-gothic personalities.
Throughout time there have been a number of stylistic differences added to cursive handwriting. Before the printing press, to be a scribe was a lucrative and valued occupation, especially for those who had mastered more than one cursive style. Copperplate, Spencerian Copperplate and Palmer Method, to name just a few, became popular among academics and governmental clerks alike; each one indicating certain characteristics and purpose of the writer. Even though Copperplate was around before 1776, it was the script chosen to write the declaration of independence. At the time, Copperplate was associated with learning and gentility; a message definitively not lost on the crown.
If all handwriting is an expression of the culture of its time, cursive added the possibility of the expression of the soul of the writer. To validate the axiom that cursive is a reflection of personality, several scholars, including Abbe Jean Hippolyte and Milton Bunker believed that “the slightest movement of the pen is the vibration of the soul” and that “one’s character could be improved by working on one’s handwriting”. The correlative analysis of handwriting as an indicator for personality inspired the discipline of graphology. Although the jury is still out on the scientific ability to glean personal information through the analysis of his or her handwriting, graphology has proven itself in correctly identifying gender and intelligence of test subjects.
If there is a conscious reason behind choosing a writing style to convey purpose, it stands to reason that the use of block writing too may have a more profound meaning. When compared to its cursive counterparts, block letters stand autonomously apart connected only by each letters contribution to a word. If handwriting is indicative of generational personalities, it is easy to infer that block letters are an expression of a culture with a greater sense of autonomy and separation amongst individuals. Where other styles of writing were a mark of a professional trade, such as Copperplate used by scribes, in the age of computers where all formal writing is typed, it seems natural that writing too would followthis trend.
Extinction generates contemplation and sometimes nostalgia. As cursive faces extinction, the conversation about its disappearance is more than timely, it’s necessary. On the one hand the transition to block lettering could be little more than a natural progression in the course of man, an outer expression of a generation’s unique inner world. On the other hand it could be a clear warning, screaming and jumping up and down to get the attention of people to take a more critical look at the course of education in the United States. Whether it is nostalgia for tradition or concern for the minds of the future, this issue presents a clear cause for debate. If we give up the art of cursive, what else have we left out of our children’s education in the pursuit of standardization? What are we saying about who they? How are we shaping who they will become by limiting the tools of expression they are exposed to?