Writing for Penmanship

Lately I've been reflecting on the correlation between writing as a physical activity and writing as a mental activity. We often consider writing to be reflective, expressive, existential and many other things, but the phenomenon exists when the mind becomes written words. A thought can exist in images which then portray an event or emotion, and often times writers attempt to share or relive an emotion through words. Ironically, these emotions are often too complex to fully describe linguistically.

Regardless of the perception of thoughts, society spends more time teaching how to write than how to think and the result has become an awkward focus on penmanship. For many years, if someone could not write in shorthand (cursive) then they were labeled as bad writers, but what constituting this label? Were they really bad writers or did they lack the ability to physically write a working piece in their minds?

In recent years, typing has enabled many people to avoid penmanship altogether and rarely do we find a student who can neatly and properly utilize shorthand (cursive). Many people debate over this lost art, arguing, "What if they have to write something in cursive?" Honestly though, how many required moments will take place? Cursive possess a beauty and neatness but its' relevancy is in presentation and not syntax, style, voice or any other truly valuable aspect of writing.

Although in terms of penmanship, print still serves a significant importance, typing has become a way for many to write. I have overheard many adults referring to grammar and writing applications as being a blessing. The generations are changing and writing changes with them, but the question still remains, "Do we need to write neatly or write well?"