Re: Shukaraz - new script

B. Garcia wrote:

> > I admit I have a soft spot for complicated writing systems, e.g. for
> > tengwar, for Hangul, or for German stenography (which unfortunately is
> > very ugly like any kind of shorthand), and I remember I was much more
> > productive when I still created normal alphabets (where there's no
> > difference between consonant signs and vowel signs).
> >
>
> I'm not sure what you were pointing at with the above.
Plain alphabets take less time.

> not all of us have access to the "right materials". This is
> why i discussed writing your glyphs in the style of the script style
> you intend, or to take letter forms. For instance, i doubt very many
> of us have access to Talipot palms (Corypha umbraculifera - the
> traditional source of palm leaves for palm leaf writing). Perhaps
> you have a ready supply of talipot palm leaves that are prepared but
> the average conscriptor doesn't.
I've never even touched a single leaf of that palm!

You're right, the claim I made about practicing with the adequate tool
is not very realistic for many. However, I think the awareness of the
writing tool is important, and I think it helps a lot to produce the
style of the script style you intend.

And a broad pen e.g. or a brush aren't that difficult to get. They're
by no mean necessary, but usually, people are surprised of how fast
they can get very nice results once they've tried out a broad pen. It
shouldn't prolongue the act of inventing a script too much, on the
contrary, I believe it helps.

g_0ry@_ˆs:
j. 'mach' wust