I would say that computers(and to a lesser degree typewriters) are what killed cursive.<p>Cursive is the sloppy form of latin characters that you use when you have to write by hand a lot, the reduced specification on word separation and form really help the letters get out quick. see shorthand for an even quicker modern engineered version of this. When you no longer have to manually produce a large body of text(you have your machine spirit do the writing for you) It no longer makes as much sense to keep the cursive forms around. A cultural loss for sure but in the same vein as knowing how to skin a rabbit.<p>Some languages (arabic comes to mind) have had their cursive form completely replace their block form(I actually don't know if arabic ever had a block form, it would certainly be incorrect if you tried to use a block form of arabic today). Unfortunately the same slurred features that make cursive so quick to write also make it difficult for the machine spirit to handle. Now I want to look up arabic typewriters.
Writing utensils definitely influence scripts. One tidbit I like is the evolution of the Burmese script.<p>The Burmese script was originally square format but became round and cursive due to the popular use of palm leaves (and others) as a medium: straight lines would rip the leaves, so softer round strokes were preferred [1].<p>The round cursive style is in stark contrast to modern Devanagari (India) where the strong overhanging line is a core feature [2] despite both scripts descend one way or another from the Brahmi script [3].<p>As for the OP, ballpoints have come a long way such that one could easily find a ballpoint that is sensitive enough for a Palmerian style (but perhaps not Spencerian as that genuinely requires varying line thickness).<p>[1] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burmese_alphabet" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burmese_alphabet</a><p>[2] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devanagari" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devanagari</a><p>[3] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmic_scripts" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmic_scripts</a>
When I was in school, I wondered why my hand hurt from writing so much. I switched to gel pens and my hand fatigue went way down.<p>We put up with a lot in the name of cost. The thin blue Bic pens are much cheaper, but when I have to use one I really hate it.
I find it very hard to buy into the core premise of this article. Namely:<p>> Sassoon’s analysis of how we’re taught to hold pens makes a much stronger case for the role of the ballpoint in the decline of cursive. She explains that the type of pen grip taught in contemporary grade school is the same grip that’s been used for generations ... modern pens requires that they be placed at a greater, more upright angle to the paper—a position that’s generally uncomfortable with a traditional pen hold.<p>I was lucky enough in college to study calligraphy & penmanship through an independent study program. Most days I would be at my desk writing for six to ten hours. It was an obsession. After graduating, my practice continued at this pace for the next four years. I have experienced zero cramping or discomfort in my hand.<p>In that time, I've used an array of pens. From traditionally cured and cut quills, dip pens, to modern fountain pens. Ultimately, the vast majority of my practice was done with a ten cent Bic pen. They're cheap, reliable, and write quickly & consistently.<p>The actual difference between writing then vs. now has less to do with the pen itself, and more with how it's handled.
Your poor, unpracticed, overly-tense grip on the pen is what causes discomfort. As does manipulating the pen with the fingers, rather than the larger muscles in your arm/shoulder.<p>Penmanship education, I'd argue, has been non-existent in America for well over a full generation. The further you go from the so-called "Golden Age of Penmanship" (~1860-1920), the more distance there is from real, quality professors of penmanship. Institutional knowledge is lost, and present day teachers are merely parroting back things they were told to be true, rather than educating based on a deep-seated practical knowledge.<p>Penmanship, and thus cursive, was incrementally killed by ever-easier ways of putting text to paper. Typewriters -> word processors -> computers -> cellphones.
My cursive was dead on arrival, or so I recall. It has been almost sixty years since I was introduced to it, so my recollections are vague. I thought that we might have started with pencil before moving on to fountain pens. I'm not sure how the southpaws, at least ones with fine-motor skills as bad as mine, kept the ink off their wrists.
This is hardly the first time a cursive style has died out:<p><<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%BCtterlin" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%BCtterlin</a>>
Cursive was still taught when I was in school. With ball point pens.<p>This was the case for many years after dip pens were retired.<p>They stopped teaching cursive handwriting. Full stop.
We had to use nib-based pens until 1st Form, when we were allowed biros. Suddenly my clothes were no longer soaked in ink, my pages were no longer Rorshach inspired artworks.<p>And my writing, for the first time ever, was legible. This is what killed cursive, it's bloody hard to read.