Does copying a great book by hand improve your writing?

>>9131134
Just practice penmanship with the books they used a hundred years ago. I did that and my penmanship became beautiful.

that's like asking if tracing pictures will improve your drawing

it it it it it it it it it won't

>>9131827
But that's wrong. It does. It gives you a feel for the lines.

>>9131148
link

>>9131851
well my mistake then; I was merely desperate for a comparison

>>9131827
You'll pay attention to the details of the writing.

Bump.
RL Stevenson said something like that made him write better, although I'm not a fan of his style.
Interested in others' opinions.

>>9131872
Eh. Copying always involves paying closer attention to what you're doing, and what the creator did (or what you think the creator did), so you learn.

When I draw something I've never drawn before, I trace a picture of said thing first. That way, I know at least how that thing in composed.

Sometimes I type out passages from books I like and I always end up getting a lot out of it and remember those scenes way more than other parts of the book.

I dont know if it improves writing but it definitely improves a reading.

basically>>9132768

>>9131134 (OP)
That is actually a nice question.
I would say no when it comes to improving the way you use the language.
You need to read and analyze many great works and then transfer what you have learned into your own writing.

I would say if you copy by hand a great book you will be able to remember that book much much better, but it would be tedious work.
While rereading (with intent of analysis) might be more enjoyable and prove similar results.

Perfect Practice is more effective than Emulation though.

Didn't Hunter S. Thompson do this with The Great Gatsby?

>>9131134
Yeah. Technically everything improves it.

>>9133612
Came here to say this. Yes, he did, and according to him it helped improve his writing.