Scientific Handwriting (Including Diagrams, Equations Etc.)

[adim]

Hello everybody!

 

I'm a young mathematician and I take lots of handwritten notes in my research. As I'm very interested in improving my handwriting, but I also have quite a strong opinion about some aspects which I'll state below, I thought I'd start this topic, not only for my case, but hopefully some fellow scientists will share their thoughts, as well as any other member, of course.

 

So, to start off, although in primary school I was taught cursive with a slant to the right, as it's most common, I came to like (almost) upright writing not long after. Generally, I find it more legible and even when writing fast, it keeps the letters from cramming one into another. I do love looking at Spencerian or other classical handwriting forms, but I for one could never do it and honestly, I like more the round shapes of letters rather than ovals (in the case of 'a', 'o' and others, for example).

 

Now, I'm not sure you agree that what I termed "scientific handwriting" deserves a special name and topic, but I really think it makes a difference looking at a full page of prose and one which has equations, diagrams and other symbols interspersed. I've been looking at famous mathematicians' and physicists' handwriting from the 19th century on and I hold the same opinion as above: I really don't like the Spencerian script, more so in the case of equations.

 

On to my case. I have prepared 2 cases, one in which I wrote in (my upright-ish) cursive and one in (my take on) print. I know that my handwriting needs overall consistency and much improvement, but I really think that the print-ish variant is much more legible and even from a distance looks more tidy. Whereas in cursive, the loops and curves of the letters make it look somewhat crowded. Moreover, when equations or diagrams come in, I cannot make them look tidy enough, as if the "humanist" part of the loops and curves doesn't fit in.

 

The main downside in the print-ish variant is that my hand gets tired quicker, since I have to separate most of the letters and some letters are written from right to left, which seems unnatural (e.g. 'f'). Also, as you can see, I cannot find a balance between ligatures and separate letters (the main reason why I called the style print-ish).

 

Therefore, I decided to start this topic first to read your thoughts on whether scientific writing deserves a special attention (as opposed to "full prose", so to speak) and secondly, to find your opinions for my case.

 

Thank you for your time and attention!

 

Adrian

 

P.S. Hopefully I did nothing wrong by uploading the images via imgur. Please excuse me and let me know if that's not the case.

 

 

[sidthecat]

You might be interested in some of the scientific writing in this exhibit. Im working with Edward Johnstons casual script, which is handsome and legible, although its hard to find many examples in print. It might be useful to look into.

 

I saw that this exhibit was opening at the Morgan Museum in New York, on my commute in by bus:

 

Handwriting works magic: it transports us back to defining moments in history, creativity, and everyday life and connects us intimately with the people who marked the page.

For nearly half a century, Brazilian author and publisher Pedro Corrêa do Lago has been assembling one of the most comprehensive autograph collections of our age, acquiring thousands of handwritten letters, manuscripts, and musical compositions as well as inscribed photographs, drawings, and documents.

 

This exhibitionthe first to be drawn from his extraordinary collectionfeatures some 140 items, including letters by Lucrezia Borgia, Vincent van Gogh, and Emily Dickinson, annotated sketches by Michelangelo, Jean Cocteau, and Charlie Chaplin, and manuscripts by Giacomo Puccini, Jorge Luis Borges, and Marcel Proust.

 

Rather than focusing on a single figure, era, or subject, Corrêa do Lago made the ambitious decision to seek significant examples in six broad areas of human endeavorart, history, literature, science, music, and entertainmentspanning nearly nine hundred years.

 

From an 1153 document signed by four medieval popes to a 2006 thumbprint signature of physicist Stephen Hawking, the items on view convey the power of handwriting to connect us with writers, artists, composers, political figures, performers, explorers, scientists, philosophers, rebels, and others whose actions and creations have made them legends.

 

https://www.themorgan.org/exhibitions/magic-of-handwriting

 

[knarflj]

Adrian, I am no scientist, but I have always found an upright, rounded hand to be the most easily legible, and have always used an upright print, or semi-connected print script (print-ish) for note taking or other things that might be referred to often or need to be scanned quickly for information. There's a reason why book hand got its name. Back in the day when libraries had card catalogues with hand-written cards, the script used (at least in the US) was also upright, or sometimes slightly back-slanted. You may find these links of interest (a modern adaptation of book hand, and two sites showing examples of library hand):

http://www.jp29.org/bh.htm

https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/library-hand-penmanship-handwriting

http://www.library.upenn.edu/exhibits/pennhistory/library/cards/cards.samples.html

 

I have done a couple of tests, writing the same passage from memory in my "print-ish" script, cursive (Spencerian-derived), and italic, and find that print-ish is actually faster for me than either of the other two. I am still rather new at italic, so perhaps that will change if I get better at it. I still find, though, that when I'm writing a rough draft I prefer one of the non-upright scripts - they feel as though they flow better, even if they're not really any faster. But of course that doesn't apply to your field of interest.

 

Jenny

[adim]

You might be interested in some of the scientific writing in this exhibit. Im working with Edward Johnstons casual script, which is handsome and legible, although its hard to find many examples in print. It might be useful to look into.

 

 

Thank you very much for that! The exhibits are really precious and I have looked previously at Einstein's, Gödel's and Hilbert's handwriting, but I assume that for historical reasons (i.e. "trends", if I may say so), most are of the Spencerian kind, slanted and cursive.

 

However, I did find modern (contemporary) lecture notes of especially American or British mathematicians to use (almost) exclusively print style, either connected ("print-ish") or totally disconnected.

 

Thank you for the Edward Johnston reference as well! I did not know about him and will try to find more resources!

 

Adrian, I am no scientist, but I have always found an upright, rounded hand to be the most easily legible, and have always used an upright print, or semi-connected print script (print-ish) for note taking or other things that might be referred to often or need to be scanned quickly for information. There's a reason why book hand got its name. Back in the day when libraries had card catalogues with hand-written cards, the script used (at least in the US) was also upright, or sometimes slightly back-slanted. You may find these links of interest (a modern adaptation of book hand, and two sites showing examples of library hand):

http://www.jp29.org/bh.htm

https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/library-hand-penmanship-handwriting

http://www.library.upenn.edu/exhibits/pennhistory/library/cards/cards.samples.html

 

I have done a couple of tests, writing the same passage from memory in my "print-ish" script, cursive (Spencerian-derived), and italic, and find that print-ish is actually faster for me than either of the other two. I am still rather new at italic, so perhaps that will change if I get better at it. I still find, though, that when I'm writing a rough draft I prefer one of the non-upright scripts - they feel as though they flow better, even if they're not really any faster. But of course that doesn't apply to your field of interest.

 

Jenny

 

Thank you for the "book hand" reference, I was not aware of that style. Also, the links you provided are very useful. And yes, I agree, my handwriting seems to slant and go into cursive if I'm writing fast, that seems more comfortable. Or maybe it's a case similar to your italic learning -- I have to practice more, to break my habits. I was taught cursive, slanted handwriting in school and I've only met 2 people to write beautifully in print(-ish). Similarly, I haven't met any American or British mathematician at conferences to write in cursive. So it's definitely also a thing of education.

 

As a side note, I totally love Bookman's handwriting

e.g. here https://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/topic/295371-handwritten-your-favourite-quotes/page-61#entry407394

and I've been trying to imitate him, but without any real success. The sharpness of his letters is something I cannot teach myself without cramming the letters one into another, I don't know why.

 

Of course, there are many gorgeous examples of handwriting in that thread, but I tend to think that they belong more to the calligraphy section than to casual, everyday note-taking, drafting. I know there are people who have a state-of-the-art handwriting regardless of speed or medium, but I'm certainly not one of them and I don't think I can educate myself to be. The most important characteristics I aim for are consistency (at least in letterforms, e.g. not to have many kinds of lowercase L or r) and order, with or without guide paper.

 

All in all, thank you both for your detailed replies and most useful references! I will now pay closer attention to the "book hand" style that I was unaware of.

[corgicoupe]

Take a look at the book "Write Now" which suggests what they call italic. I began printing when I was studying engineering in university some 50 years ago. This little book encouraged me to improve some aspects of my handwriting while not insisting that I change entirely.

[adim]

Take a look at the book "Write Now" which suggests what they call italic. I began printing when I was studying engineering in university some 50 years ago. This little book encouraged me to improve some aspects of my handwriting while not insisting that I change entirely.

 

Thank you for the recommendation! I am aware of the italic style, however I am really not comfortable in writing slanted. But as I can see, the Getty-Dubay method shows only a minimal slanting. I will look into it, thanks again!

[Paganini]

Hi Adrian,

 

+1 for investigating italic handwriting.

I learned Spencerian handwriting as a child, but was never very good at it and I hated it. Part of the problem is surely that I was learning with a pencil, while all the examples were written with 19th century copperplate pens. Anyway, as a result, after a short time I absolutely refused to do cursive writing and printed everything in all caps until well into my 20s.

 

I really like office supplies and writing (and math too; I did a lot of math in high-school; I get the aesthetic appeal of a nicely presented equation, above and beyond the simple utility of legibility). A few years - actually almost 10 - I undertook a handwriting repair project using a book by Rosmary Sassoon. It might have been this one: https://www.amazon.com/Teach-Yourself-Better-Handwriting-New/dp/0071636382 (she has several)

 

Her system is based on the italic script they're teaching in Icelandic schools. It was a fascinating project and my handwriting has improved, although it is still kind of spiky and uneven. I still write in my handwriting repair journal almost every day.

 

One of the most interesting things I learned is that handwriting repair is literally saving lives; an all-too common cause of death in the developed world is that the illegible scrawls of physicians leads to pharmacists filling prescriptions with the wrong medicine for patients.

 

Generally speaking, you should not feel bad about eliminating joins from your writing - they do not enhance legibility - or adopting a more upright / slightly slanted letterform.

 

If you can track down a copy, you should get a copy of Arrighi's Running Hand: A Study of Chancery Cursive by Paul Standard. It is out of print, but it is amazing. Used copies pop up on Amazon for not too much from time to time:

 

https://www.amazon.com/Arrighis-Running-Hand-Translation-Explanatory/dp/080080323X

 

Good luck!

- N

Edited July 24, 2018 by Paganini

[adim]

Hi Adrian,

 

+1 for investigating italic handwriting.

 

I learned Spencerian handwriting as a child, but was never very good at it and I hated it. Part of the problem is surely that I was learning with a pencil, while all the examples were written with 19th century copperplate pens. Anyway, as a result, after a short time I absolutely refused to do cursive writing and printed everything in all caps until well into my 20s.

 

I really like office supplies and writing (and math too; I did a lot of math in high-school; I get the aesthetic appeal of a nicely presented equation, above and beyond the simple utility of legibility). A few years - actually almost 10 - I undertook a handwriting repair project using a book by Rosmary Sassoon. It might have been this one: https://www.amazon.com/Teach-Yourself-Better-Handwriting-New/dp/0071636382 (she has several)

 

Her system is based on the italic script they're teaching in Icelandic schools. It was a fascinating project and my handwriting has improved, although it is still kind of spiky and uneven. I still write in my handwriting repair journal almost every day.

 

One of the most interesting things I learned is that handwriting repair is literally saving lives; an all-too common cause of death in the developed world is that the illegible scrawls of physicians leads to pharmacists filling prescriptions with the wrong medicine for patients.

 

Generally speaking, you should not feel bad about eliminating joins from your writing - they do not enhance legibility - or adopting a more upright / slightly slanted letterform.

 

If you can track down a copy, you should get a copy of Arrighi's Running Hand: A Study of Chancery Cursive by Paul Standard. It is out of print, but it is amazing. Used copies pop up on Amazon for not too much from time to time:

 

https://www.amazon.com/Arrighis-Running-Hand-Translation-Explanatory/dp/080080323X

 

Good luck!

- N

 

Thank you so much for all the details and resources!

 

I will definitely investigate and surely work on my handwriting, as I really need to write daily for my research and teaching notes, so that's a good excuse to practice, anyway.

 

Regarding illegible prescriptions, yes, that's quite a morbid truth that I was aware of, as I have a few doctor friends (with legible handwriting, fortunately).

 

As for the "handwriting repair project", that sounds very interesting, I will investigate.

 

Thanks again for the input!

[corgicoupe]

One of the interesting things about the "Write Now" book is that it is not typeset; it is hand written!

[txomsy]

Sorry for the late answer, but what's wrong about mixing scripts?

 

When I take notes I find myself mixing scripts on the fly as I need. So writing I take in slanted cursive, some times titles are in italics or Copperplatish or some such, and most times math, tables, etc. are in round/vertical script. I even mix colors to distinguish notes (topics, or to stand out something....) They're my notes, so as long as they're convenient for me (to write/read), I think it's OK.

 

I had an awful writing as a kid. It only improved after I started using only fountain pens in secondary school, so I got used to not give a dime about other people's opinions of my writing as long as it did work for me and those who mattered to me (teachers) could read it.

 

If you find it easier for you to write one way for some kind of notes (e.g. because it tires you less), and in a different way for others (e.g. because they are more legible), why not?

[adim]

Sorry for the late answer, but what's wrong about mixing scripts?

 

When I take notes I find myself mixing scripts on the fly as I need. So writing I take in slanted cursive, some times titles are in italics or Copperplatish or some such, and most times math, tables, etc. are in round/vertical script. I even mix colors to distinguish notes (topics, or to stand out something....) They're my notes, so as long as they're convenient for me (to write/read), I think it's OK.

 

I had an awful writing as a kid. It only improved after I started using only fountain pens in secondary school, so I got used to not give a dime about other people's opinions of my writing as long as it did work for me and those who mattered to me (teachers) could read it.

 

If you find it easier for you to write one way for some kind of notes (e.g. because it tires you less), and in a different way for others (e.g. because they are more legible), why not?

 

Nothing wrong about mixing scripts and I agree that this can even be a useful technique for organization, beautification and overall legibility of some notes.

 

However, I was trying to choose and ask for advice, because I tend to think my handwriting is awful, regardless of the style.

 

In fact, I think I can pinpoint the actual problem: whenever there are letters with loops, more rounded, flourishes or whatnot, I seem to make them highly inconsistent, which overall makes the handwriting look bad. So the loops in my "g, f, j", for example, are generally bad. I reckon I can get this fixed by practicing control over circular movements, i.e. just writing loops, curls, circles etc, but since I have to write a lot every day for my job anyway, I prefer practicing by actually writing. Which doesn't seem to be the best idea I guess, as I see almost no improvement in the last years.

 

I generally don't like Spencerian (I like to see it in historical documents, but would not want my notes written in that style) and have always tried to write straight or with a slight slant to the left. Also, since I know my loops and flourishes generally look bad, I've tried to simplify my handwriting, thus going towards print-ish. I like the "book hand" style that knarflj suggested above and I like italic as well, but there's **a lot** to practice for that and I try to "cheat" by trying to incorporate one letterform at a time in my style. So while I wouldn't write pages of "a"', "b"s etc., I would consider paying more attention to, say, my "e"s this week, my "f"s next week etc, while actually writing.

[sciumbasci]

 

In my studies of Calculus and Mechanics I found out that something like this works best, because it stays legible even if you write it tiny. I don't know how exactly is that script called. Cursive italic?

Might not be elegant, but it is functional and highly legible.

[adim]

 

In my studies of Calculus and Mechanics I found out that something like this works best, because it stays legible even if you write it tiny. I don't know how exactly is that script called. Cursive italic?

Might not be elegant, but it is functional and highly legible.

 

Thanks for the reply. I agree it's highly legible, although my only complaint is the total lack of ligatures. I love many print scripts and I know those involve actually separate letters. However, I find it tiresome to break every letter. But that's mostly what I'm after, although it may not look like that.

[sciumbasci]

Nothing stops you from innovating, as in developing your own style. That's what I did to improve my chicken scratches!

[txomsy]

Nothing stops you from innovating, as in developing your own style. That's what I did to improve my chicken scratches!

I second that.

 

If your problem is loops, do without them. When I have the time, I try to write a consistent, cursive, but when taking notes half of the letters are just plain sticks. And, if you can read this message, then it must be OK (notice how in this default sans-serif web font, there are no loops and it is still legible).

 

Consistency, I agree, is most probably the key. Just find a way that is legible and comfortable for you, and then simply try to make letters equal and lines straight.

[adim]

I second that.

 

If your problem is loops, do without them. When I have the time, I try to write a consistent, cursive, but when taking notes half of the letters are just plain sticks. And, if you can read this message, then it must be OK (notice how in this default sans-serif web font, there are no loops and it is still legible).

 

Consistency, I agree, is most probably the key. Just find a way that is legible and comfortable for you, and then simply try to make letters equal and lines straight.

 

Thanks for the heads up!

 

Yes, again, consistency is main problem.

 

As for style, I feel more comfortable writing in cursive, thanks to the ligatures, but it's much more legible without them and more of a print style. As stuff gets more complex (i.e. ligatures, in cursive), I make it uglier.

 

Again, thank you very much for all the replies, to you and the others!