Letter Perfect: The Marvelous History of Our Alphabet from A to Z
By David Sacks (2003)
David Sacks's Letter Perfect attempts to tell the story of the alphabet through twenty-six individual chapters, one for each letter. The book's fundamental premise proves sound: the alphabet represents one of humanity's most consequential inventions, and tracing its evolution from Egyptian hieroglyphs through Semitic adaptation to Greek refinement and Roman standardization illuminates the development of literacy itself. Unfortunately, Sacks's execution undermines his ambitions. The book reads like a collection of weekly magazine columns awkwardly assembled into book form, lacking cohesive narrative structure and analytical depth. For some readers Letter Perfect will prove a disappointment.
The Core Story
Sacks establishes that the alphabet originated when Semitic tribes in Egypt adopted hieroglyphs not as pictorial symbols but as sounds, enabling them to write down their own Semitic language. This revolutionary simplification occurred around 2000 BCE, transforming writing from a system requiring hundreds or thousands of symbols into one manageable with fewer than thirty.
The alphabet then migrated from the Phoenicians to the Greeks around 800 BCE, a transfer that proved transformative. The Greeks added vowels, which Semitic writing had largely omitted, creating the first true alphabet capable of representing speech with precision. From the Greeks, the alphabet passed to the Etruscans and Romans around 700 BCE.
Sacks traces how "a great deal of change was affected during the Roman Empire as the Romans adapted Greek letters, words and sounds." The Dark Ages brought further evolution, and the invention of printing imposed new standardization pressures. The Norman invasion of 1066 introduced "many French words and pronunciations to the language," fundamentally reshaping English orthography.
A striking detail: "The Roman alphabet has 23 letters. Even Samuel Johnson's dictionary in the late 1500s had only 24, no J or V." Johnson's alphabet thus ran "H, I, K" and "T, U, W," treating J as a variant of I and V as a variant of U. The modern twenty-six-letter alphabet represents relatively recent standardization.
The Structural Problem
The book's organization by individual letters creates inherent difficulties. Each chapter must stand somewhat independently, resulting in repetitive explanations of background context and loss of narrative momentum. The approach suits serialized magazine publication, where readers encounter one letter weekly, but fails in book form where readers progress continuously through all twenty-six chapters.
This structure prevents Sacks from developing sustained analytical arguments about the alphabet's evolution. Instead of tracing how phonetic systems emerged from pictographic writing, or analyzing why certain sounds proved difficult to represent, or exploring the political and cultural forces that shaped standardization, Sacks provides disconnected vignettes about individual letters.
Missed Opportunities
The alphabet's history raises questions Sacks barely addresses. Why did alphabetic writing, once invented, spread so successfully compared to other writing systems? What social and economic conditions enabled Semitic tribes to make the conceptual leap from hieroglyphs to phonetic symbols? How did literacy rates and educational practices change as writing systems simplified? What role did the alphabet play in the development of democracy, philosophy, and law in ancient Greece?
Sacks gestures toward these questions but never pursues them systematically. His letter-by-letter approach encourages antiquarian trivia over historical analysis. Readers learn isolated facts about individual letters without understanding the larger patterns of linguistic evolution.
The book also suffers from inadequate attention to the relationship between spoken and written language. The alphabet represents sounds, but sounds change over time while spelling often does not. English orthography's notorious irregularity reflects centuries of phonetic evolution frozen in outdated spellings. Sacks mentions this phenomenon but never explores its implications for literacy, education, or language standardization.
The Norman Impact
Sacks identifies the Norman invasion of 1066 as a crucial moment when "many French words and pronunciations" entered English. This understates the transformation. Norman French didn't merely add vocabulary; it fundamentally reshaped English grammar, pronunciation, and social stratification of language. The division between Germanic words for common things (cow, pig, sheep) and French-derived words for their meat (beef, pork, mutton) reflects the power dynamics of Norman rule.
Similarly, the inconsistencies in English spelling often reflect attempts to represent French sounds using an alphabet developed for Latin. The letter combinations that seem arbitrary to modern readers made sense in their historical context. Sacks mentions this but doesn't develop the analysis readers need to understand why English spelling proves so challenging.
The Printing Revolution
Sacks notes that "printing had an impact" during the Dark Ages, but this severely understates printing's transformative effect. Before Gutenberg, manuscripts were copied by hand, introducing variations with each transcription. Printing imposed standardization, freezing spelling conventions and making dictionaries possible. The relationship between printing technology and linguistic standardization deserves sustained attention Sacks never provides.
What Works
Despite its limitations, Letter Perfect does convey the basic evolutionary path of the alphabet from Egyptian hieroglyphs through Phoenician, Greek, Etruscan, and Roman adaptations to modern forms. Readers unfamiliar with this history will learn something valuable about the origins of the writing system they use daily.
The detail about Johnson's twenty-four-letter alphabet reminds readers that even seemingly fundamental elements of literacy are historically contingent. The letters J and V are modern additions, not ancient fixtures. This recognition should prompt awareness that writing systems continue evolving, responding to changing linguistic and technological conditions.
Critical Assessment
Letter Perfect fails as both history and linguistics. As history, it provides inadequate context about the social, economic, and political forces driving alphabetic evolution. As linguistics, it offers insufficient analysis of the relationship between writing systems and spoken language.
The book's magazine-column structure prevents development of sustained arguments or analytical frameworks. Readers encounter disconnected facts about individual letters rather than coherent explanation of systematic patterns. The approach might work for casual browsing but frustrates anyone seeking genuine understanding.
More fundamentally, Sacks never articulates why the alphabet's history matters beyond antiquarian interest. What does understanding alphabetic evolution teach us about language, literacy, cognition, or cultural transmission? How does recognizing the contingency of our writing system inform debates about spelling reform, literacy education, or language preservation? These questions remain unaddressed.
The book's brevity, which might seem a virtue, actually compounds its problems. At magazine-column length, each letter receives inadequate treatment. A longer book with more comprehensive analysis would better serve readers than this collection of sketches.
Recommendation
For readers seeking serious treatment of alphabetic history, linguistics, or writing systems, Letter Perfect proves inadequate. Better alternatives exist that provide both accessible narrative and genuine analytical insight. Sacks's book might serve as light introduction for complete novices, but even casual readers deserve more coherent organization and deeper engagement with the material.
Sacks had worthy material to work with—the alphabet's history genuinely fascinates and illuminates broader questions about human communication and cultural evolution. But his execution, hampered by awkward structure and superficial analysis, squanders the opportunity.
Letter Perfect reads exactly like what it apparently is: weekly columns assembled into book form without the revision necessary to create genuine coherence. The result serves neither readers seeking entertainment nor those pursuing understanding. The alphabet deserves better than this perfunctory treatment, and readers interested in its history should look elsewhere for satisfaction.
Read Letter Perfect only if you have exhausted superior alternatives and seek merely a brief, disjointed introduction to alphabetic evolution. Otherwise, invest your time in works that treat this important subject with the analytical rigor and narrative coherence it deserves. The story of how humanity developed efficient writing systems that enabled the preservation and transmission of knowledge across generations merits more than disconnected magazine columns masquerading as a book.