Page:Theory and Practice of Handwriting.djvu/71

Rh lessons or copies two kinds of, , , , and ? These letters being generally made in large hand without the loop but in small hand with it. Common sense replies Certainly not! Why should we? The rule is not consistently observed in the first place, for the lower loop letters remain unchanged, and the letter is sometimes deprived of its upper loop and at other times of its lower. It is more easy and natural to make a loop, uniformity therefore

should rule the question and teach writers that shape of letter they will adopt in their future life and practice. How difficult too, if not impossible it is for young children to draw those tremendously long and rigidly right lines! How seldom they ever do it! Fig. 23 is an average specimen of the strokes which infantile fingers are supposed to make. In conclusion it should be noted that in actual script work neither the size nor the shape of the letters under consideration is ever required. Taking the small letters we observe that has been the cause of much controversy. Shall it be the ordinary script form or the Roman type outline (see p. 95, Fig. 27)? To hear the several champions hold forth on the claims of their respective outlines one might imagine that there were numerous vital questions involved in the discussion, whilst in fact there is nothing but the most trivial of differences and the most imperceptible of advantages on either side. Both forms are good as initial, medial or final, and what the first or script form boasts of in the matter of speed–for it is undoubtedly more quickly made than its rival–is counteracted to a great extent by its inferiority as to legibility when in union with certain other letters. The very absence of any weighty reasons will we fear prolong the agitation to an indefinite extent if indeed it does not prevent entirely any positive and ultimate decision.