Hello Typeface: Exploring intuition, association and knowledge within the field of typography by Arantxa Gerards

exploring intuition, association and knowledge within the field of typography

Student Name Arantxa Gerards Student Id 14437455 Submission Date 14 July 2015 Course Graphic Communication, BA Hons Institute University of Northampton Module Code 2DD4002

Hello Typeface exploring intuition, association and knowledge within the field of typography

Contents Introduction

Chapter 1

The essence of typography as part of the communication process and the graphic designerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s responsibilities Chapter 2

Intention versus interpretation Chapter 3

National typefaces and typeface neutrality Chapter 4

Case studies Brand recognition

and packaging design Events in history

The peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s typeface

Conclusion

References

Bibliography

Illustrations

“We have 26 letters in our alphabet, that’s 26 individual characters and they are just that – characters, patterns of behaviour, personality – each with their own distinctive nature. Add to that the plethora of typefaces and through design their personalities become more defined and perhaps also more exaggerated – letters become shapes and forms as they shift toward illustration”. (Monachino, 2011, p. 6)

Introduction This essay’s aim is to explain why a typeface can never be free of connotations due to cultural, geographical or historically loaded associations.

Typefaces have a prominent role in our daily lives. Not only are we looking at one right now, within the immediate surrounding area we will be able to find at least ten to fifteen different types – all serving their own purpose. The average person may not think about it very much, but that does not mean typography doesn’t have a meaningful role within communication. Some of the typefaces around us may tell us important information, try to persuade us into buying something, or want us to make a decision. Ultimately, it is typography that bridges the gap between the verbal and visual; the spoken and written word.

[1] The term “type consumer” is borrowed from The Type Taster (Hyndman, 2015, p. 9). Everyone is a type consumer as we all encounter and interact with typefaces as we go about our daily lives. In this essay the term is used to distinct the graphic designer who works with typefaces professionally from the average person who interacts with them, though this does not mean a graphic designer is not a type consumer as well. It is proven that graphic designers look differently at typefaces than regular type consumers, therefore in some cases the distinction between the two is absolutely necessary.

On a daily basis we encounter first impressions. We meet new people and subconsciously pay attention to the way they move around and without realising we have formed a mental image of that person by their age, gender, ethnicity (and so on) before we have even listened to the accent or tone of voice as they introduce themselves. With typography this is no different. Instantly, typefaces convey a meaning, mood or atmosphere, and they bear historical and cultural references. Imagine the magic as you alter size or shape, spacing or positioning and the possibilities become endless.

Although typefaces are mainly functional, many of them, if not all, mean more beyond their visuals; they evoke emotions and associations. They can look and be perceived like anything from formal and informal to playful and friendly, and everything in between. Some of these typeface connotations are grasped by type consumers[1] based on their intuition, others on associations or perhaps learned knowledge or skills if they are a professional in the field of typography or graphic design. Even the typefaces that are seen as the most neutral ones inevitably evoke associations, and they can be culturally, geographically or historically loaded. In the last chapter we have a look at three case studies: brand recognition and packaging design, events in history, and the people’s typeface. Some of the subjects we explore are the consumer’s awareness of the perception of brand logos and packaging design, how a single typeface gave London a visual identity, and how Barack Obama’s design team used a typeface’s connotations to their advantage during the 2008 election campaign. This essay’s aim is to investigate all the variations, and explain why a typeface can never be free of connotations.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;One way to think of communication design is in terms of three dimensions: vitality, clarity, symbolism. It is the optimal blend of these qualities that attracts attention, presents a message understandably, and targets the message to make the desired impression on the selected audienceâ&#x20AC;?. (Gottschall, 1991, p. 124)

The essence of typography The essence of typography as part of the communication process and the designer’s responsibilities.

For years, many graphic designers argued legibility as being the most important aspect of typography. Legibility is the quality that enables words to be read easily, quickly and accurately (Tarr, n.d., cited in White, 2005, p. 93). According to many graphic designers legibility is central to typography because type is, above all else, meant to be read. However, no one seems to agree which treatment leads to perfect legibility. White argues “complexity will not get a message across because, though it may be interesting to look at, it will not be legible” (Ibid., p. 21). He continues to say that simplicity alone will not work either because, “though it may be easy to read, its importance won’t be recognised” (Ibid., p. 21). Other responsibilities that are often mentioned are clarity and unity. White (Ibid., p. 77) says that design is a search for unity, a continuous balancing act between sameness and emphasis to make a single, powerful impression. In terms of typography, this means for elements to be arranged in a way they make sense as a whole, for example by grouping text elements and distributing these elements on a page. Airports also borrow this idea of clarity and unity. Most airports use the same typefaces, namely Clearview, Frutiger or Helvetica. These typefaces are chosen not only because they are highly legible, but also because the type consumer will

instantly think of them as important information telling typefaces; they are similar in style to the type found on signage along roads (Hyndman, 2015, p. 19). Of course, words that you find on road signs, such as ‘stop’ on the stop sign, are just messages and the typefaces their messengers, but replace any other word that requires action for it and the impact on the receiver’s end will be the same. “[It] invariably trips a cognitive switch that compels obedience to such an extent that any sign set in the same demonstrative lettering style has equivalent power” (Heller, 2015, p. 18). “Typefaces that exude power spell out commands, convey orders and announce decrees, which ultimately govern human behaviour. The choice of types to serve this purpose is not just an aesthetic decision, but a deliberate means to force people to STOP or GO, LOOK or LISTEN, LOVE or HATE, and READ. Typefaces that demand compliance succeed, in large part, because they are invested with symbolic attributes culminating in real consequences” (Ibid., p. 18).

With that information in mind, one could wonder why Northampton Borough Council chose to use Comic Sans on their road signs to tell car drivers they are about to enter a 20 mile per hour zone and drive with care (figure 1). According to an ongoing survey by The Type Taster, Comic Sans is seen as a friendly and welcoming typeface (Hyndman, 2015, p. 83). In that respect, one could understand why they displayed “drive with care” in Comic Sans. Car drivers are entering a neighbourhood; therefore the Borough Council council will want to make them aware that children are potentially playing out on the streets and parents may be taking their children to nearby schools. However, with associations like that Comic Sans is not necessarily seen as a typeface to be taken seriously and by displaying the message as such it takes away completely from the importance of this urgent message (figure 2). Moreover, with all the other signage on the street the message needs to be authoritative to be heard against all the other visual noise. Overall, it is the graphic designer’s responsibility to add understanding to that what is being read, and in this example it is clearly done incorrectly.

Drive with care Comic Sans MS

Drive with care Helvetica

[Fig. 2] The example on the left shows the difference in urgency as “drive with care” is being displayed in two different typefaces.

[Fig. 1] Northampton Borough Council confuses the car driver down Trinity Avenue by using the wrong typeface for the job.

Thanks to computers and programmes where people with little or no experience in typography can choose a typeface from a dropdown menu, in recent decades many type designers have argued the importance of symbolism rather than legibility, unity and clarity. Graphic designers have come to appreciate the psychological side to their profession and realise that an increased understanding of typography can help communicate effectively. Typography is defined in many different ways and no one ever seems to agree which is the right definition. However, many of those graphic designers do understand typography is not a written language, but a visual one. Words can be seen and not necessarily read, and when we think of it as that typography can be used as form to echo content (Monachino, 2011, p. 6). As a result many graphic designers intuitively or consciously consider the symbolism that typefaces bear in them, and make sure they choose appropriately so the visual outcome enhances the meaning of the message. Unfortunately, there is not one successful recipe that works in every single situation, as much depends on how a typeface is used as on which typeface is selected (Gottschall, 1991, p. 124). As human beings we are often called social animals. Communication is not only vital to our well-being, but acts as a very powerful way of surviving. The communication process is often explained in two different ways. In the first view communication has taken place when a message has been sent and received. In this view it is assumed that the sender communicates the message with a certain intention

and the receiver interprets this message. In the second view the communication process is explained as a more participative process where the receiver is not only interpreting the message, but also interacting accordingly (Swann, 1991, p. 19). With the distance between the graphic designer and their audience, the first view is generally accepted across the broad field of graphic communication. Language is the transmission of complex ideas via a system of sound signals and each language consists of multiple different sounds that on its own bear very little meaning. These sounds, called phonemes, are unstructured and most often make no sense without putting them together in a word or sentence (Swann, 1991, p. 10). In speech people adjust their use and tone of language according to the situation they are in. With the use of typography, the same results can be achieved. These changes in use of language (called registers) are most commonly from informal to formal (or neutral) and quite naturally happen on a semi-conscious level (Ibid., p. 28). Though proven to be difficult, it is always important to know how your message will be received. In speech it is easy to adjust use and tone of language by awaiting and observing the reaction of the hearer. In print, however, with so many different receivers and the physical distance between the graphic designer and the receiver, this is much harder to achieve (Ibid, p. 48), but not impossible. In 1933 typographic expert Beatrice Warde already made the comparison between the human voice and typefaces, saying that if you would set

a page in Fournier against Caslon and Plantin it would be “as if you heard three different people delivering the same discourse – each with impeccable pronunciation and clarity, yet each through the medium of a different personality” (Warde, 1933, p. 138). We have established a great difference between spoken and written language, moreover there is another big gap between written and visual language. These differences demand extra attention and need to be carefully thought out in order to be successful. Any wrong deviation from the intended meaning can have disastrous consequences (Swann, 1991, p. 29). Therefore, many graphic designers agree that it is among their responsibilities “to be aware of the type[faces] available and to choose those that communicate clearly and with the correct tone for every message” (White, 2005, p. 15). According to White (Ibid., p. 11) the very essence of typography is translating spoken language into printable form where verbal emphasis becomes an equivalent visual emphasis. He suggests that it is the graphic designer’s responsibility to “predigest the copy, understand the message, and show off its meaning and its [2] What is the difference between the terms typeface and font? Typeface means a collection of fonts; it is the broader term for a family that shares features that are alike, whereas fonts determine style (weight, slant or proportion) and size. For example, Baskerville is a typeface (family) and it can be set in many fonts, including but not limited to, regular, italic, semibold and bold.

importance to the reader. (...) Know what the thrust ought to be, then make that point crystal clear through design choices” (Ibid., p. 21). While certain emphases are easily made in speech using variations in pitch, loudness or speed this is not necessarily easily done in print (Swann, 1991, p. 48). These changes can be emphasised by making use of the typeface’s family[2]. Each typeface typically consists of multiple fonts; they give the graphic designer extra options when a simple roman font does not suffice. Next to a roman (often called regular) font many typefaces have at least an italic or bold version. These versions are not, as many think, a variation of the existing font, but separate designs; italic is not simply slanted and bold is not just a thicker version of roman. Making use of these options is a straightforward solution, but it has proven to be of extreme use in differentiating nuances in language. They can provide the graphic designer with more freedom without having to choose another typeface to indicate importance, for example. Lastly, one could think of changes in contrast, font size, weight, positioning, hierarchy, colour and other typographic treatments.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Type, like the spoken voice, can be powerfully bold or elegantly understated. It can shout or gracefully inform. It can be stuffy or informal, universal or parochial, traditional or state of the art, highly complex or primitive. But unless the reader grasps something of value, his conversion from a looker to a reader will not occurâ&#x20AC;?. (White, 2005, p. 23)

Intention versus interpretation The graphic designer’s intention versus the type consumer’s interpretation.

Interpretation is a complex process; when one reads it is not simply a matter of interpreting words but also bringing considerable knowledge of the world and personal bias to bear on the intended meaning (Swann, 1991, p. 42). White (2005, p. 29) suggests that type consumers do not register typographic design; they read type, not see it. He says “if typographic design registers in the reader’s mind at all, it is - or should be - only in the subconscious. [Graphic] Designers, by contrast, must both read and see type”. Subconscious indicates that we still process the information but that it is not at the centre of our attention. In other words, it is still within the threshold of awareness, but “hidden in plain sight” (Hyndman, 2015, p. 31). Monachino (2011, p. 10) suggests the same, saying that most typefaces are being seen on a subconscious level with the reader decoding the message “using both their own frames of reference and those universally recognised”. [3] Brumberger’s research was not able to conclude that age is of no influence as 91% of the participants were of the same age range (18-23).

A 2003 study by Brumberger adds to the aforementioned arguments. Brumberger suggests typefaces are

perceived based on prior knowledge, associations, expectations and experience. In the study 80 participants (of which half are male and half are female) were asked to ascribe attributes to a list of 15 different typefaces. These typefaces were all shown similarly in the same font size and as part of the sentence ‘the quick brown fox jumps over a lazy dog’, all using the full lower and uppercase alphabet including numerals. Along with this list of typefaces came a demographic form where participants were asked for their age, gender, ethnicity and first language, among other information. One would expect this information to be of influence as participants ascribe personas to typefaces since all of these factors individually shape people’s experiences and therefore expectations, however, Brumberger concluded her research saying that even though it revealed “that participants did, in fact, consistently ascribe particular personality attributes to a given typeface (…) none of the demographic factorsappear to have significantly affected perceptions of typeface persona[3]” (2003a, p. 221).

Intuition will often tell you if the chosen type treatment is right. Appropriate type treatment can enhance the reading experience, simply because the reader does not have to focus on the words and individual letterforms. When the reader sees an unfamiliar or unexpected typeface it takes longer to process what he is reading, in other words it will slow down the reading process. “When a task is perceived as unfamiliar, unusual, or especially difficult we are obliged to invest greater time and attention to tackling it. We reflect, we analyse and apply reason and logic. Such thought processes are relatively slow, can only handle limited amounts of information at any one time, and consume a great deal of energy” (Lewis, 2014). It is also suggested that the reader becomes aware of the process when he has difficulties deciphering the message (Hyndman, 2015, p. 56). This information is particularly interesting in marketing, because “people associate familiarity with truth” (Lewis, 2014). This was illustrated in a 2007 study where two groups were given sales information in a familiar and unfamiliar font. The participants were then asked whether they would like

to commit to the purchase or would rather think about it. In the unfamiliar font group 40% asked for more time, whereas only 17% in the familiar font group did so (Novemsky et al., 2007). However, it is not only familiarity that is of great importance; context plays another great role. In another study, Brumberger investigates whether “readers identify certain typefaces as more (or less) appropriate for certain texts” (2003b, p. 225). This study was based on Brumberger’s aforementioned study in which different typeface personalities were identified. In the conclusion it is indicated that readers are definitely very aware and can tell when there is a (mis)match between the chosen typeface and the message it is trying to convey. According to Brumberger “participants had very clear and consistent opinions about typeface appropriateness” (Ibid., p. 226). She goes on to explain that “participants clearly perceived typefaces with particular personas to be more appropriate for texts with particular personas” (Ibid., p. 227). In short, the research suggests that it is not suitable to use a typeface when it is not in line with the message. This can be compared to going to a job interview in a swimsuit; it is simply inappropriate and out of context.

Evidently, typography can be of great influence in the perception of visual language. The term visual language refers to the interpretation created by the visual appearance of text, whereas the opposite term, verbal language, describes the literal meaning of words. In previous paragraphs we have clearly established there to be an undeniable link between how words are perceived and how these words look visually. Like each tone of voice or facial expression, typefaces convey a certain mood, meaning or atmosphere. Therefore, it seems obvious that typefaces can easily alter the meaning of your message. Not only is this something to be aware of as a graphic designer to avoid miscommunication and get across the proper message, moreover this is important to get across the appropriate mood or atmosphere. We can use typefaces to their fullest potential only if we choose the right one. In short, choosing the right (or wrong) typeface can have a powerful effect on the perception of information.

hello HELLO

[Fig. 3] The word ‘hello’ is displayed in two different typefaces. The reader will perceive both of these examples differently according to their own typographic treatment; in this case font weight, font style and typeface.

This is easily illustrated by displaying a simple word like ‘hello’ stylized in two different typefaces (figure 3). The left example is a very strong, confident ‘hello’. It is quite clearly eager to see people and wants to give them a warm welcome. On the contrary, the right example comes across as a rather shy, silent one, in such a way that it perhaps does not really want to see or talk to anyone. Despite saying the exact same thing, the right ‘hello’ has a dramatically different impact than the left one. This difference can easily be explained if we have a closer look at the stylization of these words.

The left ‘hello’ is written in a bold typeface, all characters lowercase and kerned closely together. The characters in the right example are much wider apart and italicized and the word is positioned very much cornered, which gives the reader a distant feeling. Saying both words out loud helps understand the example even better. The left one will sound as a loud and enthusiastic ‘hello’, whereas the right one will be quiet and almost quite reluctant (Knight and Glaser, 2012). Then again, this interpretation is rather subjective. It is evident that everyone – graphic designer, client or readers in general – interprets messages differently, and the true meaning of it cannot be argued, only explained and openly discussed.

Typeface neutrality Discussing national typefaces and relating this to the neutrality of typefaces such as Helvetica.

Over time many countries have developed what is sometimes referred to as a national typeface. This should not be taken in the literal sense, as there is no typeface that exclusively belongs to one nation. When printing arose around 1450 the ways in which we communicated completely changed. Around that time knowledge became widespread as a result of the mass production of books. Naturally, typefaces started travelling around the world as much as any other information did. For example, Garamond is associated with France, Caslon with England and Bodoni with Italy (Ruder, 1967, cited in Swann, 1991, p. 56). These typefaces are reminiscent of those countries because it is their country of origin; it is where they were cast in metal before type designers all over the world started to use them. England, France and Italy all have an exceptional history in type design. Naturally, the country in which a typeface is created reflects in the letterforms of the typeface, thus the letterforms bear great historical and cultural references in them.

[Fig. 4] Festival of Britain Poster by Abram Games, 1951. (Anon, [n.d]).

Gill Sans, Johnston Sans, Baskerville, Caslon and Festival Titling are just a few of the many letterforms that all lead back to England. These typefaces are widely celebrated and used and remind many of the nation’s rich history in type design. Caslon was used for the Declaration of Independence, Johnston Sans has given London a widely recognisable identity and Festival Titling

was specifically designed for the 1951 Festival of Britain. Renowned British graphic designer Abram Games used this typeface in the promotional posters (figure 4) and a glance at one of them will give the viewer a perfect sense of 1950’s nostalgia (Hyndman, 2015, p. 50). Garamond was designed by Claude Garamont in 1540 and became the first national typeface of France. It was commissioned by François I, the reigning French monarch of the time, who believed that standardised typography would make governance easier. Garamond was then used for all official papers and became a symbol of French enlightenment (Heller, 2003, p. 40). However, there is more to France than Garamond. Typefaces such as Didot, Plantin and Fournier are all distinctly related to the French language. One of Italy’s major contributions to the canon of typefaces was through the introduction of roman and cursive variants during the Renaissance period. This was due to the public’s dislike of blackletter; they were in favour of a more legible style. These new styles, now known as regular and italic fonts, quickly spread across Europe after having been acquired by many type foundries. Since then, the type has proven to be enduringly successful and it remains as the most prevalent typeface in countries using the Roman alphabet (Garamond, [n.d.]).

Since the early 1900’s we have seen very little of typefaces with a national character to them arising; it is for this reason most of the recent typefaces can be used in a variety of languages and have a more international attitude. For example, the standard typewriter letterform is often seen as one of the earliest international typefaces. “It is understandable that difficulties in communication across frontiers would have aided the development of separate national characteristics, especially as printing was established throughout Europe by then [in the period from 1500-1800] and had a stabilising effect upon the fluctuations of language and style within the national borders. Such a period of time, with all its visual manifestations, becomes part of a cultural heritage and is then deeply embedded in it” (Swann, 1991, p. 56). This change was defined by the Modernist movement of the 1920’s where “[graphic] designers began to reject these typefaces [Garamond, Bodoni, Caslon, etc] in favour of new ones that were free from historical and cultural ‘baggage’” (Hyndman, 2015, p. 80). Whether we call it grotesk, sans-serif or gothic, to this day sansserifs represent modern typography. The association was defined by Jan Tschichold in Die Neue Typographie (published in 1928). In this book it is evident that Tschichold sought the solution in having a single typeface only that could work for all purposes. Later on in his career, Tschichold opposed his own words by saying he

should have over thought his immature ideas more carefully and “it was a juvenile opinion to consider the sansserif as the most suitable or even the most contemporary typeface” (Petit, 2015). However, by that time sans-serifs had already grown out to be the face of modern typography. In 1957, just years before Tschichold dramatically changed his opinion, Helvetica was designed and it was aggressively marketed in the 1960’s; thus it became almost exclusively the only typeface to be used by the Swiss typography style of that era (Majoor, 2007, p. 35). In the last few decades, there has been a huge revival in the use of sans-serif typefaces, and it instantly reminds us of the Swiss era. The origin of the sans-serif typefaces, however, does not lie in the 1920’s. The type designers who aimed to have a typeface free of connotations based their typeface designs on the existing sans-serif types, which had been developed in the early 1800’s; the type designers of that time were in turn influenced by designs (which looked more like shapes) of the ancient Greeks. After these shapes had been refined for many years, they began to influence type designers all over Europe (Daines, 1990, p. 20). As a result sans-serif typefaces are often thought of as European (Garfield, 2011, p. 44), like slab serifs are undeniably a representation of the late nineteenth century. Slab serifs were used as display letters for bills and posters, and are now often associated with the printing of old wanted posters (Heller, 2003, p. 41). Thus it is fair to establish that many typefaces represent the era and context in which they were designed, but also

[Fig. 5] A stick of type in the font that is the subject of “Helvetica” [the documentary by Gary Hustwitz published in 2007]. (Zoller Seitz, 2007).

that associations are stimulated by the historical and social context of the typeface. “Letters are never neutral no matter how “neutral” they may look. Every style and approach is weighted with its unique baggage. Neutrality itself, a trait often praised in Helvetica and other modernist types, carries somewhat conflicting associations of both intellectuality and blandness” (Strals et al., 2009, p. 47). We have established that total typeface neutrality does not exist; though, when asked which typeface

comes close to it, many graphic designers argue Helvetica as the embodiment of neutrality. And it is not just Helvetica; sans-serif typefaces in general are often considered neutral, perhaps because they are mostly free of stylistic associations and embellishments. Letterforms in general are of abstract nature, though this opens them up to plenty of subjective interpretations and associations. Therefore, a letterform free of decorations does not determine typeface neutrality. Neutrality should mean free of connotations: a typeface without social, cultural and historical references. It cannot be fashionable, nor can it be nostalgic. Perhaps it is

that some confuse neutrality with invisibility, which is not the same thing. When a typeface is free of distracting details it is invisible, not neutral. In that respect Helvetica should rather be seen as an invisible typeface, because undeniably Helvetica has geographic baggage. Being a Swiss typeface there is definitely a sense of impartiality, neutrality and freshness to it (Garfield, 2011, p. 135), however, that is exactly the paradox: it is recognised as just that, and therefore is not free of connotations.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Typefaces and typography are never designed in a vacuum. Practical and commercial motivations prevail but social and political rationales are never far away. Type design and typography are routinely informed by conscious and unconscious contexts that change with timeâ&#x20AC;?. (Heller, 2003, p. 40)

Case studies Brand recognition and packaging design, events in history and the people’s typeface.

Brand recognition and packaging design

[Fig. 6] Coca-Cola logo. (Logopedia, [n.d.]). As type consumers we only need a fragment of the full logo to understand which brand we are looking at. Despite having changed its official brand’s logo numerous of times over the last decades, Coca-Cola remains to have one of the most recognisable brand logos in the world.

[4] For further reading material on this topic one could read the Sweet and Sour experiment by The Type Taster (Hyndman, 2015) or The Brain Sell, When Science Meets Shopping by Dr David Lewis (Lewis, 2014).

Graphic designers are well aware of the influence a brand’s logo can have on the consumer. They also understand how important typefaces are when creating a brand’s identity, and that many successful logos can be recognised by their type alone. As type consumers, sometimes all it takes is a fragment of the full logo to understand which brand we are looking at. For example, we only have to see a glimpse of the Coca-Cola logo set in its famous script letters and we instantly know which brand this logo belongs to and which product it is associated with (figure 6). Our brain can be seen as a “pattern-matching machine”; it compares what we look at to things we have seen before and saved to our memory (Hyndman, 2015, p. 16). Brumberger’s recent research has proven how aware type consumers are and we have established that this general awareness of typography could affect or change perceptions. This idea plays a particularly big role on packaging design. Walk around a shop and you are surrounded by thousands of different labels each displaying their own message and trying to encourage

us to purchase them. Most of these labels we process on a subconscious level, however, as consumers we also look at these labels to determine whether a brand or product is cheap, expensive or hand-made. Some research suggests that it is possible for a typeface to change your perception of taste. Crisps can taste saltier and crunchier, sweets more sweet or sour and a soup tastier and more enjoyable. This may all seem far-fetched but the results are astounding[4]. To investigate this theory of typefaces altering the experience of taste, two groups of participants were given similarly designed menus promoting the soup as “rich and creamy”, however, doing so by using two different typefaces. Both groups were served the same soup, yet 66% of the group that was given the menu in an elegant typeface rated the soup as tastier, fresher and more enjoyable than those in the other group (Lewis, 2014). With typefaces being able to create such an illusion, it seems an obvious task for us as graphic designers to take this to our advantage and achieve perfect communication.

Some industries are defined by a certain typeface; they always convey the same meaning and are recognised and expected to do so. The packaging industry would not be one of them, however, the fashion and cosmetics industries are dominated by modern typefaces such as Didot (France) and Bodoni (Italy). These typefaces are recognisable by their extremely contrasting thick and thin elements (Hyndman, 2015, p. 49). Modern typefaces have been used widely on fashion magazines. One could wonder whether they were chosen for their gendered associations, but as a result of their use since the 1920’s we now think of them as feminine, elegant and refined. One could even say modern

typefaces have become these industries ‘little black dress’; embodying the true identity of both industries. “The connection between Didot, Bodoni and the topic of fashion is so embedded that not only do Vogue and Harper’s Bazaar [figure 7] continue to dress themselves in its sparkling linearity, but so do countless other magazines and brands” (Miller, 2007, p. 21). However, it is not just the fashion industry that uses typeface associations to its advantage. In the cosmetics industry typefaces are often chosen for their ability to convey a sense of luxury and glamour.

[Fig. 7] Harper’s Bazaar August ‘52. (Pasts, 2014).

[Fig. 8] National Socialism Julius Streicher Der Stürmer 1941 Nr. 25. (Luminate, 2011).

Fraktur as seen in this 1941 copy of Der Stürmer. The “spiky blackletter masthead” (Heller, 2015, p. 22) in red leaves a lasting impression.

The quick blackletter

brown fox serif

jumps sans-serif

over slab serif

a lazy script

dog symbols/dingbat

[5] Typeface classifications are helpful to identify, choose and combine typefaces (Haley, n.d.) and help us to better understand the forms and history of typefaces. The first system was first published in 1954 as the Vox system. In it typefaces are distinguished based on their characteristics and classified into a few basic groups. The groups have changed since then, mainly due to typefaces making their way into the digital realms, however, the principle remains the same: to break down typefaces into basic groups such as serifs, sans-serifs, blackletter and script in order to increase the understanding of these basic styles. Despite not every typeface clearly belonging to one classification only, the typeface classifications in general provide us with a great point of reference. For example, Baskerville falls under transitional, a subcategory from serifs. The classification “usually include[s] a vertical axis, increased stroke contrast, and details that appear formalised and constructed, like symmetrical serifs” (Strals et al., 2009, p. 34).

Events in history One of the classic examples of connotations is the Germanic blackletter. Often blackletter gets confused for being a single typeface with Fraktur being the only typeface from this particular typeface classification[5]. On the contrary, blackletter has many different variations and is widely known for its use in Gutenberg Bible which was printed around 1450 in Germany. Though the use of blackletter was far from ideal for a great number of reasons. Blackletters have great detail in them and as every letterform was individually cast in metal the process was very time consuming. It is also said that the paper used at the time could not capture this detail very well, moreover the type consumers of those days had difficulties reading the type. So in short, due to print evolving and blackletter being too difficult to print as well as read, it became less popular in use throughout Europe and was substituted for roman. Only Germany and other German speaking countries remained to use blackletter, and from this point on the association of the type changed and it became known as a nationalist German type. Early 1900’s the use of blackletter was long attacked for being antiquated, therefore, it was replaced by sansserif typefaces. Mainly lead by Jan Tschichold sans-serif typefaces were up and coming until the Nazi government revived the blackletter typefaces as part of their propaganda leading up

to the Second World War. Sans-serifs were considered too modern and ‘unGerman’, thus, considering its great historical and cultural references, the Nazis declared Fraktur to be the ideal Germanic typeface. They even went so far as to declare it Volk (literally Nation). It became the government’s semi-official typeface and a symbol of its anti-Semitism. In 1941, the Nazis ironically banned the use of blackletter for its Jewish origins, though this was also a practical solution (Heller, 2003, p. 40). After all, blackletters were still difficult to read in any non-German speaking country. Although Fraktur was not used for propaganda purposes after 1941, it will “(…) forever [be] tainted as a reminder of Hitler's crimes against humanity. Anyone who has seen the spiky blackletter masthead of the viciously anti-Semitic Nazi weekly, Der Stürmer [figure 8], will experience the magnitude of the typeface's evil representation” (Heller, 2015, p. 22). Today the long history of blackletter is often forgotten and, despite its negative associations that have been added over time, it is not uncommon for the type to still be used. In fact, it is still in use today: as mastheads on numerous newspapers around the world, as logos on heavy metal album covers, and as signage on pubs that rely on blackletter’s associations of establishment and tradition. This particular case study proves that context is of great influence with typeface connotations.

The people’s typeface On designing Johnston Sans, Edward Johnston gave London an identity. A great one, in fact, that has been widely recognised as one of the most successful corporate identities of all time. Johnston Sans is often considered the first modern sans-serif typeface and appreciatively regarded as the first people’s typeface. It was designed for daily use and contributed to society and everyday life (Garfield, 2011, p. 115). Johnston Sans can mainly be found in London’s underground: on signage, tube maps and other printed materials that form the identity of London transport. A similar example can be found in Gotham, a typeface designed by Tobias Frere-Jones in 2000. The typeface was not in significant use until it was used in 2008 as part of Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. Even though it was not designed for this purpose, the use of it can easily be explained. Frere-Jones once said that he had intended the typeface to capture a feeling of authority and he feels as though “Gotham is not pretending to be anything it’s not” (Garfield, 2011, p. 211). Many people consider the typeface to be honest, sincere and believable. Sarah Hyndman suggests that Gotham, inspired by the signage that you see around New York, is very

[Fig. 9] Obama Hope poster. (Patches, 2015). Gotham was used in Obama’s Change campaign in 2008. It stood out for being bold and confident and is now seen as the people’s typeface implying freedom of speech.

much the people’s type. It was used in the Change campaign because of those connotations and “added its own new meanings, so now we associate it [Gotham] with the Obama Change campaign and with New York and freedom of speech” (dandad, 2014). Then there is Paris, the capital city of Art Nouveau. The style became popular in the 1890’s and was of great influence on typography throughout Europe until before World War I. Art Nouveau can be best described as an erotic movement. Former visual taboos, “including a prodigious amount of nudity” (Heller, 2003, p. 43), were made visual in the Art Nouveau typefaces and ornaments. Seventy years later, Art Nouveau travelled to American cities such as New York and San Francisco where it inspired the psychedelic art movement. There, the lettering that defined Art Nouveau, was “adopted (…) as the code for the sex, drugs, and rock’n’roll generation” (Ibid., p.43). The style can still be found on many café signs around the city and on the Paris Metro (Hyndman, 2015, p. 76).

An entirely different example can be found in the remarkable work of German printmaker Käthe Kollwitz. She often addressed fundamental problems such as poverty, hunger and war through her work. In 1924 she designed the striking poster Nie wieder Krieg (figure 10) in response to the First World War. In this piece a young person is portrayed raising their arm with the phrase Nie wieder Krieg (literally meaning ‘Never again war’) around their body. These powerful words were not set in a typeface, but handwritten in bold black strokes, evoking emotions that no typeface ever could. In a 2015 essay, Steven Heller suggests that “type is only as powerful as the force behind the message” (Heller, 2015, p. 22). Kollwitz, having lost her son during the war, bravely put all of her emotions into this poster making a bold statement commanding that there should never again be war.

[Fig. 10] KĂ¤the Kollwitz, Nie Wieder Krieg (Never Again War), 1924. (Expressionismus in Deutschland, [n.d.]).

Conclusion

In this piece we investigated whether typefaces have a personality to them. Gradually, we have come to the conclusion that the answer lies in the middle. The research in this particular area is definitely remarkable. They have individually shown there is an undeniable link between letterforms and personality types, though much more research needs to be done in the field to establish where these associations come from. Much of what we know is merely from observation and some of the research lacks in depth or scientific background. However, research clearly shows that intuition plays a big role in the general interpretation of visual languages. Typography remains mainly functional, but it is evident that type consumers look beyond the letterforms and are influenced on a subconscious level. As graphic designers we have used this same intuition to make important design decisions. This is a subtle reminder that we should always stay alert and be aware of the fact that our intuition will be right for the public in most instances; but could also potentially be misinterpreted by the audience in a disastrous way. Typefaces associations are also clearly dependent on culture and historical contexts; certain associations may not be picked up on in English or German, as they would be in any other language or country. Thus we have established that a typeface can never be neutral and that the connotations we attribute to a typeface are rather subjective. It

is a matter of perception and relies greatly on context. We have also seen associations shift over time as a result of a pattern of use. In the subchapter ‘events in history’ we have seen how the usage of blackletter during the Second World War changed the perception of this entire type classification; no longer is it known only for its sense of establishment, but it will forever be recognised as a propaganda tool. And much more light-heartedly, the Art Nouveau lettering from the late 1800s will be associated with the 1960s psychedelic movement that cleverly used the association of erotica and free thinking to elaborate on their own ideas. Despite the already numerous amount of typefaces and font options available the full possibilities have not yet been explored. As long as type designers keep expanding their skills and knowledge of the field and put this into designing new typefaces, they will change the way type consumers understand and perceive messages. It will be interesting to see where research will go in the coming years and what it will teach us about the type consumer’s interpretation of visual languages. Also, we should wonder and start the conversation whether the graphic designer’s responsibilities should expand. As type consumers are (or could potentially be) manipulated by the typefaces we choose to communicate with, perhaps it should be our responsibility to communicate ethically and not mislead the audience.

References

Brumberger, E. R. (2003a). The Rhetoric of Typography: The Persona of Typeface and Text. Technical Communication. 50(2), pp. 206-223. Brumberger, E. R. (2003b). The Rhetoric of Typography: The Awareness and Impact of Typeface Appropiateness. Technical Communication. 50(2), pp. 224-231.

Daines, M. (1990) The Sans Serif and The Swiss Style. Baseline. 14, pp. 20-29. Dandad (2014) Using Context In Typography. YouTube [online]. Available from: http://youtu.be/OTEwNIbsM4o [Accessed 21 June 2015].

Garamond. ([n.d.]) Italian Typefaces. Garamond [online]. Available from: http://garamond.culture.fr/en/page/italian_typefaces [Accessed 11 July 2015]. Garfield, S. (2011) Just My Type: A Book About Fonts. Bungay: Clays. Gottschall, E. M. (1991) Typographic Communication Today. 2nd ed. Tokyo: Dai Nippon Printing Co.

Heller, S. (2003) The Meaning of Type. Eye Magazine. 13(50), pp. 40-47. Heller, S. (2015) Type As Agent of Power. Baseline. 62, pp. 17-23. Hyndman, S. (2015) The Type Taster: How Fonts Influence You. London: Type Tasting.

Knight, C. and Glaser, J. (2012) When Typography Speaks Louder Than Words. Smashing Magazine [online]. Available from: http://www. smashingmagazine.com/2012/04/13/when-typography-speaks-louder-thanwords [Accessed 12 January 2015].

Lewis, D. (2014) The Secret Power of Words: How They Look Matters At Least As Much As What They Say. Psycholog y Today [online]. Available from: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-brain-sell/201404/the-secretpower-words [Accessed 30 June 2015].

Miller, A. (2007) Through Thick and Thin: Fashion and Type. Eye Magazine. 17(65), pp. 16-23. Monachino, T. (2011) Let The Work Speak For Itself. Baseline. 59, pp. 6-11.

Novemsky, N., Dhar, R., Schwarz, N. and Simonson, I. (2007) Preference Fluency in Choice. USC Dornsife [online]. Available from: http://dornsife.usc. edu/assets/sites/780/docs/07_jmr_novemsky_et_al_preference_fluency.pdf [Accessed 11 July 2015].

Petit, Z. (2015) Typography Lessons From The Masters. Print Mag [online]. Available from: http://www.printmag.com/typography/aaron-burnstypography-lessons-from-the-masters/ [Accessed 12 March 2015]

Strals, N. and Willen, B. (2009) Lettering & Type: Creating Letters and Designing Typefaces. New York: Princetown Architectural Press. Swann, C. (1991) Language and Typography. London: Lund Humphries Publishers.

Warde, B. (1956) The Crystal Goblet: Sixteen Essays on Typography. London: Sylvan Press. White, A. W. (2005) Thinking in Type: The Practical Philosophy of Typography. New York: Allworth Press.

Bibliography

Armstrong, F. (2003) Hearing Type. Baseline. 42, pp. 13-20.

Bierma, W. and Lentjes, E. (2004) If The Image of The Text Has More Value Than Its Content... Eye Magazine. 14(54), pp. 44-49. Bierut, M. (1994) Looking Closer. New York: Allworth Press. Burt, C. (1959) A Psychological Study of Typography. Cambridge: University Press.

Chermayeff, I. (2008) Dysfunctionalandoutofsync experimentsinreadingandseeing. Baseline. 56, p. 6.

Farley, J. (2009) The Blackletter Typeface: A Long and Colored History. Sitepoint [online]. Available from: http://www.sitepoint.com/the-blacklettertypeface-a-long-and-colored-history [Accessed 12 April 2015]. Farrelly, L. (2010) Make Each Letter Speak Out Loud. Eye Magazine. 19(75), pp. 52-61.

Ginger, E. M. and Spiekermann, E. (1993) Stop Stealing Sheep and Find Out How Type Works. Mountain View: Adobe Press.

Haley, A. ([n.d.]) Typeface Classifications. Fontolog y [online]. Available from: http://www.fonts.com/content/learning/fontology/level-1/type-anatomy/ type-classifications [Accessed 29 June 2015].

Heller, S. (2002) Massinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Typographic Voices. Baseline. 37, pp. 25-32. Helvetica (2007) Directed by Gary Hustwit. [DVD]. [s.l.]: Veer, Swiss Dots. Hollis, R. (1995) Language Unleashed. Eye Magazine. 4(16), pp. 66-77. Holmes, R. (1998) The Work Must Be Read. Eye Magazine. 8(29), pp. 36-45. Hyde, K. and Warwicker, J. (1994) Mmm Skyscraper I Love You. London: Internos Books.

Jong, C. W. and Purvis, A.W. (2008) Jan Tschichold: Master Typographer: His Life, Work & Legacy. New York: Thames & Hudson.

Lupton, E. (2004) Thinking with Type: A Critical Guide for Designers, Writers, Editors and Students. New York: Princeton Architectural.

Majoor, M. (2007) Inclined To Be Dull. Eye Magazine. 16(63), pp. 32-37. Middendorp, J. (2007) Form Follows Function. Baseline. 52, p. 6. Morris, E. (2012) Hear, All Ye People; Hearken, O Earth. The New York Times [online]. Available from: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes. com/2012/08/08/hear-all-ye-people-hearken-o-earth [Accessed 21 June 2015].

Newark, Q. (2000) What Is A Typeface? Baseline. 32, pp. 5-8.

Poynor, R. (1993) Whatever Became of The Content? Eye Magazine. 3(9), pp. 6-7.

Re, M. (2011) Matthew Carter: Tension and Typography. Baseline. 60, p. 21. Sandu Publishing. (2013) Branding Typography. Berkeley: Gingko Press.

Sarah Lloyd-Hughes (2014) Sarah Hyndman: “Fonts: A Love Story”. Youtube [online]. Available from: http://youtu.be/DUXNIXl_7a4 [Accessed 12 March 2015]. Stiff, P. (1993) Stop Sitting Around and Start Reading. Eye Magazine. 3(11), pp. 4-5.

TEDx Talks (2014) Wake Up & Smell The Fonts | Sarah Hyndman | TEDxBedford. Youtube [online]. Available from: http://youtu.be/OXcVZ4Vwbo [Accessed 12 March 2015]. Tschichold, J. (2006) The New Typography. London: University of California Press.

Illustrations

Expressionismus in Deutschland. ([n.d.]) Käthe Kollwitz, Nie Wieder Krieg (Never Again War), 1924. Tumblr [online]. Available from: http://germanexpressionists.tumblr.com/post/45067234112/kaethe-kollwitz-nie-wiederkrieg-never-again [Accessed 11 July 2015].

Logopedia. ([n.d.]) Coca-Cola logo. Logos Wikia [online]. Available from: http://logos.wikia.com/wiki/Coca-Cola [Accessed 23 June 2015]. Luminate. (2011) National Socialism Julius Streicher Der Stürmer 1941 Nr 25. Docstoc [online]. Available from: http://www.docstoc.com/ docs/78716789/National-Socialism-Julius-Streicher-Der-Stürmer-1941-Nr25-(PDF) [Accessed 23 June 2015].

Pasts. (2014) Harper’s Bazaar August ‘52. Pasts [online]. Available from: http://pasts.co.uk/index.php/vintage.html [Accessed 11 July 2015]. Patches, M. (2015) Obama Hope poster. Esquire [online]. Available from: http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/interviews/a35288/shepard-faireystreet-art-obama-hope-poster [Accessed 23 June 2015].

VAM. ([n.d.]) Festival of Britain Poster by Abram Games, 1951. VAM [online]. Available from: http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/exhibitions/ exhibition-british-design/british-design-about-the-exhibition [Accessed 30 June 2015].

Zoller Seitz, M. (2007) A Stick of Type In The Font That Is The Subject of “Helvetica”. The New York Times [online]. Available from: http://www. nytimes.com/2007/09/12/movies/12helv.html [Accessed 11 July 2015].