Monday, 7 May 2012

What's wrong with some shorthand licence?

For those of you that don't know, shorthand is a way of writing rapidly.

Apparently, a vital journalistic skill - It is the recognised sprawl in a reporter's notepad.

For me, In class, I listen to a dictation and write the words in symbols depending on the sounds that the words contain.

I have to write 100 words per minute , I speak at I would imagine double this speed. However, this is the required speed to get a job as a hack.

I am not very good.

"Can't you just lie? and say you can do 100wpm?", said a friend at my despair.

My Granny's advice was: "Laura, can't you just ask the teacher to repeat the dictation?", or "Haven't you got a friend you can copy off?"

When I explained that neither of these would be possible, she said: "Don't worry, I know a boy, he wears lovely shoes, I mean, you could marry him then you would not need shorthand."

To be pefectly honest, not being able to read my shorthand will just make my writing more interesting - I could just invent the words which make up the unreadable symbols. What is wrong with a bit of shorthand licence?

IT WILL CLICK....say the cocky bastards who already have achieved the 100 wpm milestone. But when? I mean, Physics A level may click if I locked myself in solitary confinement for a year with a few textbooks.

Katharine Whitehorn, an 84 year old successful journalist, told me that she didn't learn shorthand as she was too ambitious and 'back in the day' shorthand often lead to being a secretary. Not sure if I could claim in a job interview that: "I am simply too ambitious to learn shorthand."

Best be off, I am currently suffering from the shorthand guilt complex. Unfortunately, I don't think that my teacher really gets the whole shorthand licence thing. Damn.