Zelgai Saleh09/25/13Period 3

My laptop killed my handwriting. It took it and destroyed it to the point that’s it’s

probably worse than my handwriting when I was 10. But is that necessarily a bad thing? In the

age of digital proliferation, where almost everything is typed up, do we have to have proper

handwriting? Jack Curry in his essay “Put it in Writing” argues, yes we do. He appeals to both

Logos and Pathos in an attempted to persuade the reader that handwriting is important, but his

lack of a clear appeal to Ethos weakens his arguments considerably.

His appeals to logic (Logos) are very short, maybe a little too short. His first logical

argument for the value of handwriting is essays on standardized tests: “75 percent of students

taking the SAT submit essays writing in printed letter”. This appeal is directed and probably

more effects any students reading Curry’s essay. When what is considered one of the biggest

tests of your life requires a handwritten section it may be nice to have nice or at least legible

handwriting. The next logical argument is his example of “Fahrney’s fine pen shop” that offers a

“cursive clinic – for adults”. This argument while at the surface seems good, is truly ineffective.

The argument is trying to prove that handwriting is important by providing one anecdotal piece

of evidence without further elaborating on it at all. He in no way shows how that proves his

point.

Curry’s appeals to emotion (Pathos) are much more numerous and are the main focus of

his essay. The main two arguments he makes are about his father and about individuality. His

first appeal to emotion is the sort of story he tells throughout his essay about his father. He

invokes emotions in the reader by showing the connection he can maintain with his father

through handwriting. He says “each sentence I put to paper traces its bloodline to Joe Curry”.

1

Zelgai Saleh09/25/13Period 3

Finally the imagery and the emotional elements of the last paragraph of the essay really tie up the

story about his father and have a large emotional impact on the reader.

The second appeal to emotion is his argument about individuality, which kind of is made

implicitly through his essay but is made out right when he says: “it’s my scrawl. The LOLs and

BTWs of my text messages look exactly like everyone else’s.” This argument may resonate well

with the reader because most people want to be individuals and unique. By saying that

handwriting is a form of expressing oneself uniquely and that typing take that away he is

appealing to the reader’s emotional desire to be unique. I think this argument is very effective in

that it appeals to a much broader number of people than many of his previous ones.

The one thing missing from his essay is an ethical appeal or credibility building (Ethos).

He fails to prove to the reader that he is a credible source and fails to say why we should actually

buy his arguments. Without this his essay loses a lot of its persuasiveness. The reader needs

some kind of reason to believe what he is saying, especially since his essay is lacking in any real,

substantial evidence. Without it, it’s left up to the reader to decide whether or not he will buy

Curry’s arguments.

All in all. I think the essay fails to properly convince the reader that handwriting is

valuable. Most of his essay is spent on making emotional appeals and telling stories, which does

very little to actually further his arguments. I think while the reader might be moved by these

emotional appeals and might start to be convinced, without any real logic and evidence the

reader will never be fully convinced of the value of handwriting. The logical parts of his

arguments are short, weak and lacking in evidence and analysis and the essay is missing ethos all

together. The Pathos of the paper is just not enough to convince the reader and would do better if

2

Zelgai Saleh09/25/13Period 3

supplemented by other elements. So, should my laptop be condemned for killing my

handwriting? Maybe not.

3