>> Handwriting was such an integral part of a person.
That's a noble thought and all but it doesn't always work like you say. I bet my school teachers would recognise my handwriting from a mile away, yet even I have trouble reading what I used to write back then. And I wrote all the time. The only time I didn't write was when I was reading (I have this weird taboo about writing on books. I'm fine with drawing stick-figure animations on the corners though; you should see my school editions of the Iliad and the Odyssey, truly epic stick figure swordfights). And just to be clear, I never had any trouble with reading, nor with grammar or syntax. It was just my handwriting that was horrible.
My handwriting was what you'd call cacography, the opposite of calligraphy. It was like a chicken dipped its claws in ink and went digging for worms on the page. Very recognisable, but really not very good handwriting at all. I think it's because I was always in such a hurry to take it all down that I didn't stop to think about reading it back later.
To be honest, computer keyboards saved my writing.
> It was like a chicken dipped its claws in ink and went digging for worms on the page.
Hilariously, my handwriting was frequently described by teachers as "как курица лапой" which is just about the equivalent of your description.
Despite my terrible handwriting though, I still enjoy writing by hand. I've found I rarely ever end up going back to much of what I wrote down, but the whole process of turning thought into word into writing is very therapeutic and helpful for remembering and processing things.
Writing fast and nice is impossible, back then and now.
I learned to write nice and slow, it is completely impractical, can't do it for long texts, but it makes me feel better after so many years of only ugly handwriting.
I completely understand this, I used to be unable to write in my books, but forcing myself to start writing in my books was completely worth it. Now it feels natural. Its extremely valuable in non-fiction works to be able to pull open to a chapter and instantly find everything I found noteworthy.
Writing in books also allows for a good notetaking workflow: read a chapter or section while highlighting interest parts and writing symbols/questions/notes when needed. Then re-read the chapter and take notes, focusing on what you highlighted. Move questions and comments to the notes, and perhaps research the answer to those questions if necessary.
Finally I would also suggest writing in books in order to instill a proper relationship with property. Books are tools for conveying knowledge, writing in a book simply continues to fulfill that purpose. They aren't idols that ought to be put on a bookshelf to look at, they ought to be read and referenced. I think being willing to write in books helps create a healthier understanding of ownership: we own property; the property doesn't own us.
That's a noble thought and all but it doesn't always work like you say. I bet my school teachers would recognise my handwriting from a mile away, yet even I have trouble reading what I used to write back then. And I wrote all the time. The only time I didn't write was when I was reading (I have this weird taboo about writing on books. I'm fine with drawing stick-figure animations on the corners though; you should see my school editions of the Iliad and the Odyssey, truly epic stick figure swordfights). And just to be clear, I never had any trouble with reading, nor with grammar or syntax. It was just my handwriting that was horrible.
My handwriting was what you'd call cacography, the opposite of calligraphy. It was like a chicken dipped its claws in ink and went digging for worms on the page. Very recognisable, but really not very good handwriting at all. I think it's because I was always in such a hurry to take it all down that I didn't stop to think about reading it back later.
To be honest, computer keyboards saved my writing.