Spencerian: Controlled Speed?

[Mickey]

I've seen the term "Controlled Speed" used in discussions of Spencerian OP, but have never seen a clear definition. If anyone is aware of one, I would be interested. While waiting, I'd like to share what I believe might be or might have been the meaning of the term.

 

One of the first exercises encountered when learning OP is rapidly writing circles or ellipses. Clearly this is to embed the shape into muscle memory, but I suspect it is (or was) also to embed a sense of constant angular rotation. That is, that direction change is a constant and that the diameter of a circle is controlled by the pen's speed. The greater the pen speed, the larger the circle. (Put another way, all circles take the same amount of time to write.)

 

Now, consider this majuscule L

 

 

 

If we accept that the pen is already moving counter-clockwise when it first contacts the page, the letter is executed as follows:

 

The quickly moving pen slows gradually to the apex of the 1st ellipse, then accelerates at a similar rate. After traveling a suitable distance, it then decelerates rapidly until the point almost reverses course,* then accelerates rapidly, continuing its course till the line crosses itself (top loop complete), at which point the rotation is reversed (to clockwise). (This creates the characteristic S curve of the capital stem.) The pen decelerates as the stem is completed, then re-accelerates and proceeds till the line crosses itself again, at which point the rotation is again reversed, and so on thorough the flourish.

 

This seems awfully complicated, and I suppose the explanation is, but the execution really isn't, nor is the logic behind it. Tight curves are written with a slow moving pen, wide curves with a fast moving pen. In other words, speed controls direction.

 

 

* remember, the pens is still rotating CC at a constant rate.

[Mickey]

I've continued looking on the internet for an explanation of 'controlled speed' and have so far had no luck.

 

As for my theory of modulating pen speed to control shape, let's see if I can do a better job of explaining. Below is a fairly common majuscule S, not my favorite S form, but it does demonstrate what I'm positing. I've added numbers to indicate where pen velocity would change. Remember, while writing this letter, the pen constantly describes a circle, either clockwise or counter-clockwise.

 

 

The pen is already moving (counter-clockwise circles) when it first contacts the page.

 

#1, the pen slows slightly at this point and the curve tightens. (n.b., rotational rate is constant)

 

#2, the pen accelerates to slightly faster than the original speed. Notice the curve is slightly flatter than at the beginning.

 

#3, the pen decelerates quickly. Note the tight curve that results.

 

#4, the pen rapidly returns to the original velocity, curve flattens

 

#5, the rotation reverses to clockwise. N. b., rotation changes are easiest when the pen is moving quickly

 

#6 the pen slows, the curve tightens

 

#7 the pen accelerates to the original speed, creating a curve parallel to the opening stroke, then continues accelerating until the pen is lifted

 

I'm not proposing that one try to steer the pen consciously using speed, but rather that one avoids trying to write with constant pen velocity, something which I believe tends to create inharmonious curves. If you watch the following clip, I believe you will see that the pen is already circling before it first contacts the page. Is it possible I've stumbled on the correct answer?

 

http://www.iampeth.com/videos/DelOP123b.wmv

 

 

Comments? Please.

Edited July 25, 2014 by Mickey

[Mickey]

I must admit to a bit of disappointment no one seems to be interested enough in Spencerian or Ornamental Penmanship to comment. It's especially disappointing since I believe I am on to something which would be useful to anyone wishing to learn Spencerian penmanship or any of it's kin. Consider this my last post unless someone expresses an interest.

 

Yesterday I reviewed "Ornamental Penmanship" by P. Z. Bloser and was particularly struck by page 67, labelled "Use these exercises to loosen up and get out the kinks. http://www.iampeth.com/books/bloser/bloser_page67.html

 

Looking at in its entirety, this suite of exercises suggests strongly that, while doing circles, ellipses, spirals, etc., angular velocity is held constant, regardless of linear velocity. Put another way, all circles (ellipses, etc.) take the same time to complete, only the pen velocity is different: high velocity - large circles, low velocity - small circles.

 

Practicing this page exactly as instructed will pay huge dividends. I would even suggest practicing with a metronome, once you discover the tempo that best suits your body and nervous system. (Everyone is a little different.)

 

[fiberdrunk]

This is awesome! I like how you've labeled the strokes to show where to speed up. This is helpful. Love the metronome suggestion. More! More!

[Mickey]

  On 7/30/2014 at 1:26 AM, fiberdrunk said:

This is awesome! I like how you've labeled the strokes to show where to speed up. This is helpful. Love the metronome suggestion. More! More!

 

So far, it looks like it's just thee and me. As I said up front, this thread is an attempt to understand better how Spencerian and OP were actually performed by 'Golden Age' penmen. From viewing the limited number of videos I've encountered, it's my observation that there is a direct correlation between pen velocity and 'authenticity', that the scripting produced at near glacial speeds, even when produced by very skilled penmen, tends to lacks the grace of the Golden Age scripting. The shapes in 'slow script' did not look quite right, at least to my eye. Based on that observation, I backed up a couple of steps in my own practice sessions to focus on developing the sort of pen velocity I saw in the Del Tysdal video I linked to above. (I'm still not all that close.) Most of what I've learned (or surmised) from work to date is already in this thread. There are only a few other, personal* observations I would add, now.

 

1) The most important thing I've gained is an insight into my own errors, the worst of which I now see come from losing (or stopping) angular velocity - steering the point rather than swinging it through the curves.

 

2) Majuscule shades are applied by the entire hand (or forearm), not the fingers. (The forearm rotates slightly in the same direction as the oval or circle to apply the shade.) Fingers shading and point steering seem to go hand in hand, as it were.

 

3) When writing minuscules, fingers become more active above the x-line (reaching for the upper loops).** Minuscule shades are applied mostly by the fingers. For me, slightly tightening my grip is all that is necessary for many shades (e.g., the second downstroke on the letter n).

 

That's pretty much it, for now.

 

* Personal - they refer to how I am now trying to write.

 

** This practice may not be entirely consonant with the Bloser warm-ups.

Edited July 30, 2014 by Mickey

[smk]

Mickey - I read your comments with great interest. I just don't have anything to contribute but am keeping notes as OP is on my to-do list in the not too distant future.

 

Salman

[fiberdrunk]

Do keep posting. I'm reading this. My challenges are a bit different. I'm a hook-over lefty. Musinkman made me an oblique pen to help compensate for my hook (it's almost a perpendicular rather than oblique pen). But I can still try to adapt what you're saying here and pay more attention to the motions.

 

As far as interest in the thread, I'm sure it's there. I've just noticed overall there doesn't seem to be as much traffic to FPN this summer. Maybe it's just my imagination. Our homeschool starts up on Monday, so it'll look like I've dropped off the face of the world for awhile. But I always try to pop in when I can. I'm very interested in Spencerian. This thread is already helping me. So don't stop even if it seems like a ghost town!

[Mickey]

  On 7/30/2014 at 7:53 PM, fiberdrunk said:

Do keep posting. I'm reading this. My challenges are a bit different. I'm a hook-over lefty. Musinkman made me an oblique pen to help compensate for my hook (it's almost a perpendicular rather than oblique pen). But I can still try to adapt what you're saying here and pay more attention to the motions.

 

 

The principles should be applicable to any sort of hand driven marking device - pen, pencil, brush, what have you. The only thing specific to Spencerian is nib orientation relative to the writing line.

 

To SMK: I think this sort of pen movement is central to flourishing, generally, and may have equal importance to Copperplate and its kin.

 

I'll post more when something new occurs to me, but for right now, I'm pretty much tapped out. Besides, I've got a book to finish.

[caliken]

I think that I know what you mean and I think that I agree with you. I'll try to put it my way, and you can tell me if

I've got it wrong.

 

The technique you describe in #2 is pretty much how I write. Producing this shape at a constant speed throughout, makes no sense to me. The ebb and flow as you describe it, is an essential part of lettering with a flexible nib.

 

I think of the sensation as similar to a child on a swing. A high backswing at a moderate speed (2) slows at the top

(3)and (4) the swing accelerates downwards (5) slowing down as the curve settles (6).

 

This constant change in velocity gives the writing its flow. Writing at an absolutely constant speed throughout, would

be very mechanical and stiff, and it would lose all of the almost sensual feeling of writing with the flex nib.

 

Ken

[Mickey]

  On 7/30/2014 at 9:04 PM, Ken Fraser said:

I think that I know what you mean and I think that I agree with you. I'll try to put it my way, and you can tell me if

I've got it wrong.

 

The technique you describe in #2 is pretty much how I write. Producing this shape at a constant speed throughout, makes no sense to me. The ebb and flow as you describe it, is an essential part of lettering with a flexible nib.

 

I think of the sensation as similar to a child on a swing. A high backswing at a moderate speed (2) slows at the top

(3)and (4) the swing accelerates downwards (5) slowing down as the curve settles (6).

 

This constant change in velocity gives the writing its flow. Writing at an absolutely constant speed throughout, would

be very mechanical and stiff, and it would lose all of the almost sensual feeling of writing with the flex nib.

 

Ken

 

Ken, I agree with everything you say here, but I'm trying very specifically to get at (understand) this technique which seems to tie a constant angular velocity (radians/second) to a variable linear velocity, (distance/sec). Embedding or reinforcing that approach seems (to me) the purpose of the Bloser warm-up I cited, and I believe objects penned in this manner will automatically seem more authentically Spencerian than objects not penned this way. In other words, some element of the style is firmly embedded in the technique (or vice versa). I don't exactly know this is true, but I'm increasingly suspicious.

[brunico]

What a change from the usual my-pen-is-better-than-your-pen it is to see intelligent conversation! This is interesting, though I'm not interested in Spencerian itself. Thank you, Mickey.

[HDoug]

I don't practice Spencerian but the thread seems to call out for video. Here are a few that show execution with varying degrees of nib velocity changes...

Beginning with "S"

Here's one that is quite long, but talk about velocity. This is what I think of as Spencerian, the handwriting. And in any case some very interesting changes in nib speed...

Doug

[Mickey]

  On 7/31/2014 at 1:32 AM, HDoug said:

I don't practice Spencerian but the thread seems to call out for video. Here are a few that show execution with varying degrees of nib velocity changes...

 

Beginning with "S"

 

 

 

Excellent example, in that I believe it shows what happens when the proposed rule for pen movement is violated, even slightly. There is obviously a skilled hand holding the pen, but observe the slight pause at :18 in the writing of the capital stem and the result. (You shouldn't reverse direction when the pen is not moving. Then take a look at the flourish on the left side of the letter. Is it attractive or simply busy? Note any inapt curves or adjacent curves that don't relate well to each other, then go back and watch the video and look for pauses or slow downs.* Finally, compare that pen movement and result with the Del Tysdal video earlier in this thread. I think you'll see what I mean.

 

Finally observe the pen movement in the following from about 8:00 on. It's so right and truly humbling.

 

http://www.iampeth.com/videos/pages/deCollibus_beyond_words_studio.htm

 

 

 

* Are the pen slow downs in a tightening curve, which is correct, or well before the tightening curve, which would not be correct according to the proposed guidelines? Less speed = tighter curves (smaller circles).

Edited July 31, 2014 by Mickey

[HDoug]

  On 7/31/2014 at 2:49 AM, Mickey said:

...

Are the pen slow downs in a tightening curve, which is correct, or well before the tightening curve, which would not be according to the proposed guidelines. Less speed = tighter curves (smaller circles).

Like an inverted version of Kepler's laws of orbital motion?

 

http://youtu.be/DijCjB8_dTQ?list=PLYkawWyDJk_v-_WCYzIeNkAcuOkcWu-S5

 

But there is nothing compelling the physical hand analogous to the physics of planetary orbits...

 

 

Pleasing to watch the differing hands write, though.

 

Doug

[Mickey]

  On 7/31/2014 at 4:37 AM, HDoug said:

Like an inverted version of Kepler's laws of orbital motion?

 

Nicely put. Low speed = small circles, High speed = large circles

 

 

  On 7/31/2014 at 4:37 AM, HDoug said:

But there is nothing compelling the physical hand analogous to the physics of planetary orbits...

 

Just the neuro-physiological equivalent of Newton's first law: a hand describing circles at some fixed rate should continue doing so at that rate unless acted upon by an external force. The warm-ups are intended to embed that fixed rate, making this is one of those rare occasion when getting stuck in a rut* highly desirable.

 

* I believe the technical term is canalization.

Edited July 31, 2014 by Mickey

[Iso*]

Looks about right, Mickey.

For the most of my developing penmanship, I have used P. Z. Bloser's text as a reference... I have printed and bound a copy. The slower hands of spencerian tend not to have that sense of grace, though there are a very select few who can have a graceful, slow hand.

I have a slight distaste seeing those who use their fingers in Ornamental Penmanship. There lacks a degree in symmetry, namely in the ovals, and the letters just appear more laboured.

I think in order to improve my own script, I will need to look into pen point velocity, though, I will need to master my forms first. I am currently using a 556 to practice my business hand before I continue my OP.

 

Just a a word of curiosity, what nibs do you use for this script? I am the type that goes super-flex and super-fine. I am currently using 357s, and I am on the hunt for finer pens. 356s are the fine-ness desired, though they lack the flexibility potential that larger nibs have.

[Mickey]

  On 7/31/2014 at 8:02 AM, Iso* said:

Looks about right, Mickey.

 

For the most of my developing penmanship, I have used P. Z. Bloser's text as a reference... I have printed and bound a copy. The slower hands of spencerian tend not to have that sense of grace, though there are a very select few who can have a graceful, slow hand.

 

I have a slight distaste seeing those who use their fingers in Ornamental Penmanship. There lacks a degree in symmetry, namely in the ovals, and the letters just appear more laboured.

 

I think in order to improve my own script, I will need to look into pen point velocity, though, I will need to master my forms first. I am currently using a 556 to practice my business hand before I continue my OP.

 

Just a a word of curiosity, what nibs do you use for this script? I am the type that goes super-flex and super-fine. I am currently using 357s, and I am on the hunt for finer pens. 356s are the fine-ness desired, though they lack the flexibility potential that larger nibs have.

 

 

 

First, thank you for your vote of confidence.

 

If you even out the tempo of your rotation (angular velocity), pen velocity will take care of itself. (Stick with the Bloser exercises.) As your technique become more confident, the tempo which you can control will likely increase, and with it the range of pen velocities you can command. That said, write boldly, don't guide the pen. Guiding the pen may initially make the letters look better, but it will block further progress.

 

Some finger movement is okay for minuscules, less okay for majuscules, even less okay for flourishing. (If Madarasz used his fingers, why shouldn't we?)

 

Pen choice is a somewhat personal. I assume by 357 you mean the Esterbrook 357, which should be good for medium-sized OP. I use the 358 and 128 most often, but my OP work is limited to majuscules. I'm a writer, not a calligrapher. The Principal (modern and vintage), its clones, and close kin are probably the most popular pens for OP, but, as I said, pen choice is largely a personal matter. Don't obsess on fineness of point. Used properly and in the right hand, the 357 is probably sharp enough. Remember, paper, ink, weight of hand, and pen velocity are no less important parameters to consider.

 

As for perfecting forms: use the forms (exemplars) to perfect your performance, not the letters themselves. That's the underlying the theme of this and an earlier thread. Technical faults will almost always manifest in the letter form. So, the goal of study is to perfect your own form. Do that and the letter forms will take care of themselves.

[knarflj]

I've been following the discussion with interest. Thank you.

[Mickey]

Out of fairness to other scribblers, to prove I am a writer, not a calligrapher, and to show where I started on this intellectual journey, I've uploaded a few line from this morning's warm-up/practice session.

 

 

The 'F' is still far from acceptably perfect, but it was the majuscule that set me off on this journey. I found this version while paging through Michael Sull's second collection of specimens, and it struck me as about as far into OP as I might safely venture. After several sessions trying to write it, I realized there was something fundamental I was missing. The thoughts in this thread are a product of trying find out what it was.

 

BTW, each 'Fine' took approximately that 3 seconds to write.

Edited August 1, 2014 by Mickey

[TXKat]

Please, PLEASE don't stop. I'm reading with facination as this is something I would love to become proficient at, but I first have to get one of those odd holders and figure out the "write" nib for it so I can learn and practice properly!! Also, do certain inks work better than others for OP??

 

Anyone with suggestions?

 

Following this thread.