+ 2 What is Typography?
Although it is thought
that the Chinese were the first to have printed characters,
Johannes Gutenberg's creation of movable type (around 1450)
is seen as a turning point in the evolution of print. It
brought about a permanent standardization of letterforms and
for the first time separated the marks being made from the
idiosyncrasies of the mark maker. The art or penmanship of
calligraphy was now redundant and a new skill developed; not
of creating, or drawing characters, but in the arrangement
of pre-drawn letters onto the printed page.
There have been some dramatic developments since Gutenberg's
invention, but until recently these changes have been
primarily in type design and not in type production. The
principle of printing remained set, whereas the letterforms
used have never ceased changing.
The dawn of the movable type coincided with the rebirth of
classical art and design at the time of the Renaissance.
Soon mathematically mapped letters, constructed like Roman
Capitals, from a circle, square and a triangle, where
reappearing in printed form. This search for a geometrical
standardisation of form within a typeface re-occurs
throughout the history of type design. Designers have always
felt the need to find a basic structural principle, or set
of 'rules', that bind letters together so as even though
their shapes are totally different they are seen as members
of a set.
These geometric principles continued in the 1700's with the
type designs of William Carlson, John Baskerville and
Giambattista Bodoni. Bodoni's self named typeface was
constructed within a modular six by six square which the
positioning of each stroke, and even the width of each
stroke referred to. The San serif typefaces of the early
1900's, for example Akzidenz Grotesk, Gill Sans and Edward
Johnston's design for the London Underground, also adhered
to a geometric structure and where again formed using the
basic shapes of the circle, square and triangle, none
more-so than Paul Renner's Futura.
Today we have the means to produce perfect geometric
structures with relative ease. But to most contemporary
typographers the idea of laying down self restricting rules
is not appealing, in a developing process where anything
seems possible. Todays anarchic type designs are not
breaking any rules; they are merely ignoring the principles
of the past. Type design is no longer a craft, but a
process. The creative element now is deciding when you are
going to divert from this process.
We are no longer standing on the verge of a digital age, we
are in it. Computers have brought the basic tools of
typography and type design to everyone. The 'old school'
typographers were once a select few, an elite, who learned
and mastered the trade over many years. "Nowadays, people
who never used to have anything to do with typefaces are
starting to discover them ... the reason is the Apple
Macintosh. Typography has been democratised, and is now only
to a limited extent the province of typesetters and graphic
designers." 4 Digital technology has changed forever how
type is designed, but our letterforms have remained
unchanged by the process. "In the past as in the present
the cultural and scientific expression of a time is
reflected in the arts, architecture and in type design. What
a poor society this must be if it is unable to express
itself and only able to copy the past." 5
We are using technology to recreate or impersonate old
typefaces that were fundamentally shaped by the conditions
of their time instead of using it as a reaction to the
reality of todays digital world. Hermann Zapf asks, "How can
you capture the spirit of, say, Totfalusi Kis, the
punchcutter of Janson, in the abstract and simplified bitmap
of a digital alphabet?" The real question should be why
would we want to 'capture' Janson?
In 1995 one of Eric Gill's more obscure typefaces, 'Aries',
was digitised by Dave Farey for 'FontHaus'. The typeface was
originally created in 1934 when Gill was commissioned by
Fairfax Hall to create a text face for the book 'A Catalogue
of Chinese Pottery and Porcelain In The Collection of Sir
Percival David'. One of the stipulations was that the face
be sympathetic with Chinese inscriptions that would
accompany the text. The circumstances in which Gill produced
this typeface are as specific as, for example, those in
which Edward Johnston created his geometric, standardised
design produced to give maximum legibility for name plates
and signs on The London Underground (which has also been
digitised recently). Both designers were aware of the
application their typefaces would be given and of the
process of production they would undergo and their designs
were shaped accordingly. Gill Sans, on the other hand, was
created as Gill put it, "for all typography". If we insist
on digitising typefaces of the past we must be selective and
reproduce only those that have a relevant place within new
technology and not recreate every alphabet that has ever
been drawn. Aries is over fifty years old. Its only merit,
and perhaps the reason a lot of effort has been put into its
digital reincarnation, seems to be that it was designed by
Eric Gill. But it is like the effect of those digitally
coloured Laurel and Hardy films - a state of the art
abstraction of its true intentions.
In his essay Type
Design for the Computer Age (1969), Wim Crouwel remarks that
contemporary type is, "anachronistic and out of touch with
our particular time," and that, "The letterforms for our
time will certainly not be based on written or drawn
examples of the past". What are the letterforms of our time?
Helvetica, Bodoni, Janson, Garamond, Gill Sans? All are in
use in the medium of our time, and can be grabbed from our
font menus, but all were created for a different era and
medium. It seems amazing that the characteristics of
letterforms conceived in stone, wood or metal are
represented by pixels in todays typography. It is like
Gutenberg using his invention to sit on as he carves his
type in stone.
In a article for 'Fuse 4' Jeff Keedy considers the
decorative letterforms of the Victorian era "...they have
different voices; some elegant and frail; some brazen and
oppressive; and others pompous and ridiculous. Even so all
of them can be heard and they tell the story of their time.
Will our types speak clearly of our age when we are long
gone?" If alphabet design is going to progress in a
technological community we must discard outdated models and
start creating for our time.
"There was a note in a
Frankfurt newspaper a few weeks ago of a new electronic
sewing machine by the German company Pfaff. This fully
electronic sewing machine has a built-in program to make
irregularities in the stitching process so that it will look
like it was done by hand, not the abstract perfection that
everybody wanted in past years. I would not be surprised if
somebody translated this into alphabet design. This would
mean we could build into some of our designs the
irregularities of the hand of the designer. This would be
foolish, somewhat like trying to copy the spirit of past
centuries in alphabet design, and of course I would not
recommend this."
Hermann Zapf (1985)
Designing for our time
means designing for the processes of our time, making the
most of the advantages and working around the drawbacks of
digital technology. In the 1960's Wim Crouwel was designing
simplified letterforms that, he believed, would alleviate
the problems of low resolution type in the impending digital
age. Mike Daines comments: "His predictions seem less
accurate now and such experimentation is largely regarded as
redundant" 6 , however, although Crouwel's designs may
have been overtaken by the speed of the change it is
significant that he was able to see ways in which our
letterforms might be adapted in order to accomodate the
prevalence of the computer in design.
The computer had an affect on all aspects of type design.
Some designers have embraced the new technology as a way of
delegating time consuming processes, for example,
typographer and graphic designer Otl Aicher's Rotis family,
which ranges from Rotis Serif through to Rotis Sans Serif
with Semi Serif and Semi Sans in between, was created on a
computer using the Ikarus programme. Aicher designed the
serif and sans serif versions of Rotis and used/trusted the
computer to compose the variants. "It is a paradox that
Aicher's stated objective for the Rotis family was optimum
readability and yet the results of the hybridization process
include some characters of unusual shape which hinder
legibility." 7 It is perhaps the knowledge that the Rotis
family was designed this way that hinders its acceptance and
true recognition. "I hate Rotis," exclaims Eric Spiekermann
in an interview for Eye magazine 18 (1995). "It's
overstarched, too perfect. I like to leave some dirt in my
work, some imperfection."
Aicher was using the technology unashamedly. He had been a
designer for over forty years and had worked with many of
the proceeding typographic mediums. But he seems to have
excepted the computer as a typographic tool without trying
to force the spirit of earlier processes into his work. When
Spiekermann talks about leaving dirt in his work it seems
like a denial of the digital process. Unless he is saying
that some of the characteristics of, for example, Meta where
accidents, or a slip of the mouse, then it is not a case of
leaving dirt, but of purposely putting dirt into his work,
which of course is the same principle as Pfaff's fully
electronic sewing machine.
There are more obvious exponents of this 'dirt' ridden
nostalgia than Eric Spiekermann. Just van Rossum and Erik
van Blokland, collectively known as Letterror, have designed
a range of typefaces called Instant Types, which are
digitised versions of existing typefaces they have come
across in everyday life. Letterror are seen as innovators in
type design. They are responsible for experimental, random
typefaces like Beowolf and Kosmik, which involve them not
just designing the letterforms, but in writing new
programmes to activate them. These designs/programmes are
forward looking, but it is notable that their Instant Types
series uses todays technology only as a vehicle to display
retrospective elements of the printed letter. Typefaces in
this range include 'Karton' a stencil typeface that purveys
the bleeding of ink printed on a cardboard box, 'Stamp' and
'Flightcase'. Probably the most widely known of the Instant
Types is 'Trixie' which is a digitised rendition of the
imperfections of a typewriter on paper. It is ironic that
the production problems of the past are being reproduced in
our 'clean' digital age. It is logical to presume that there
may soon, if not already, be a typeface called 'Faxed' or
even 'Chisel Slip'. Perhaps this is because we are not yet
comfortable with a process that is, if programmed correctly,
too 'perfect'. "The type that will now come into existence
will be determined by the contemporary man who is familiar
with the computer and knows how to live with it."
8
Fuse was
conceived by Neville Brody and John Wozencroft in 1991 "to
challenge our currently-held notions about
typographic and visual language in an age of
ever&endash;changing communications, technology and media,"
and to pose the question, "Why design?" 9. Contributors are invited and encouraged to
design a typeface, a reaction to a given theme, that
challenges the norm. Fuse aimed to be experimental, to chart
new territory. But some of this digital exploration seems to
have been hindered by its vehicle; the alphabet, which "can
never be re-invented, only endlessly repeated" 10. By 1994 Brody seemed to be advocating a
move away from these preconceived letterforms and saw the
digital future being "more to do with art than with design
communication as we know it ... graphic design is dead"
11. Brody wants to create his own private
codes and give the designer the freedom of expression akin
to the artist. He seems to be answering his question; "Why
design?" with "why not art?" But is there a place for total
abstraction in typography? Typographic design can add to the
message of visual words but it cannot do without
them.
Neville Brody; I.D. (September 1994)
4
Manfred Klien; Type and Typographers (1994)
5
Hermann Zapf; Future Tendencies in Type Design &endash;
Visible Language 14.1 (1985)
6-7
Mike Daines; Computers and Typography compiled by Rosemary
Sassoon (1993)
8
Wim Crouwel
9
Fuse Conference Chronicle (1994)
10
Eye 15 (1994)
11
I.D. (September 1994)
Brody has moved so far
ahead of the idea of emulating past processes, and so far
into new digital territory, that he is dispensing with
recognised letterforms altogether, and with them (visible)
language, in favour of what perhaps should be called
illustration.
Fuse designs are of their time, but it is a specific and
confused time which relates to, charts, struggles and
develops in the ongoing progress of digital technology.
Unlike the basic principle of print, which remained more or
less unchanged for hundreds of years, the digital progress
is moving so rapidly that typeface designs are now seen as
'modern' for only a short period. For example, Neville
Brody's "Blur" or Barry Deck's "Caustic Biomorph" can be
said to be typefaces of their time, but already no-longer of
this time. Perhaps it is because technological advances are
so integral to these typefaces that they are prone to be too
representative of a specific moment or breakthough in time,
and therefore date instantly.