The history of writing has marked the interplay between linguistics, socioeconomics, and the forces of technological change, an interplay that will shape the future of writing. (Schmandt-Besserat & Erard, p. 19)
The above quote acts as a summary of the chapters I read for this blog entry because speaks to the social and cultural forces that shape writing’s purpose and meaning. A couple of things struck me after reading the first three chapters from the Handbook of research on writing. The first thing that I was struck by was how refreshing it was to see a historical perspective, especially from the first two chapters Origins and forms of writing by Schmandt-Besserat & Erard, and History of writing technologies by Gabrial. Constantly being surrounded by lengthy academic prose in graduate school has to some degree skewed my view of writing. If someone was to ask me about writing, I believe I would find myself picturing initially recalling notions of authentic voice, process, audience and context for writing, references, multimodality, etc., but I don’t think I would have initially thought of the ancient cultures of Mesopotamia, Mesoamerica, and China. To read a historical account of writing that stretched all the way back to antiquity was energizing and highlights writing as a labor intensive processes.
The second point that I was stuck by really isn’t a single point rather the whole content from Chapter 3, History of typography. Even though this chapter documents the early inventions of typology, I found it fascinating to read because of my personal experiences with typeface as a visual arts student. One of the amazing things about different fonts is how they create an atmosphere and rhythm. How we choose to present something changes how a viewer interacts with it and typeface is no exception. The individual letters line up side-by-side to create words, then sentences, then paragraphs, and then pages. Even though fonts are small things they are powerful tools that shapes our contemporary global visual culture. One such example can be seen in a documentary I was a number of years ago in 2007 called, Helvetica. Helvetica is typeface that lacks the fancy embellishments of other typefaces. What is amazing about this particular typeface is how prevalent it is in our contemporary world. We can see it all over our visual landscape a few examples include logos from BMW, Lufthansa, Post-it, Staples, and Microsoft.
Check out the following links to learn more about this documentary: Official Helvetica Trailer // Film's Official Website // Short Clips from the Film
I am definitely going to check out this documentary! Sounds fascinating! I had a colleague once who refused to type anything in Times New Roman, because he just felt that the font expressed a kind of corporatism that he didn't buy into and didn't want to express, even indirectly, by the font he chose.
ReplyDeleteIt's a really excellent film, and it's amazing to see how one typeface impacts not only your own life and the lives of people across the global. Your colleague's is not alone in his stance. I too know a number individuals, myself included, who hold a strong dislike toward Times New Roman and similar fonts because of their expressive quality.
ReplyDeleteJen,
ReplyDeleteAs usual, I feel shamed by the beauty of your layout as well as your prose. But not shamed enough to play with the format of my blog just yet...
I did not read chapter 3 but I was interested to read your thoughts about it. I have an acquaintance who is a graphic artist. She designs a lot of logos and invitations for charity functions. I wholeheartedly agree with the fact that font conveys so much more than most people will initially admit.
I don't think you ever taught in an elementary building, but let me tell you, I have seen enough Comic Sans to last a lifetime. Not that I have anything against Comic Sans - I have been known to use it in my time. But it does convey certain, how do I say this, juvenile quality? And I'm guessing that was the explicit intent in creating the font.
Your post made me think about when I taught eight and nine-year-old students how to create PowerPoint presentations. Though font was important, students who only had the page as a means of expression now had choices not only regarding font, but color, animation, graphics and transitions. Viewing some of those third grade PPTs at the end of the animal unit was like something out of Timothy Leary's The Psychedelic Experience. I think we have to teach young children that the medium (as well as words) are the message.
I will admit that I have chosen to attend events based on if the invite looked like someone "cool" had created it. See, that makes me look like I really deserve to use Comic Sans. But I'm guessing I am not alone. I read Dr. Kist's post about his colleague who refused to use Times New Roman - which, by the way, I love. Now I'm a suit.
Are you aware of the font that is recommended for some special education students? It may be Helvetica. I've been told that is the preferred font by teachers who work with students with reading difficulties.
This conversation about fonts is very interesting. We have a friend of a friend that works for American Greetings. The way I understand it, he creates different types of fonts for the company. Fascinating...
ReplyDeleteIt is fun to read and digest another viewpoint to this type of conversation. Your artistic background and schema really sheds light in new places.
That's so interesting, Petra! I've never taught in an elementary building and I’m amazed to hear about the overwhelming presence of Comic Sans there. I don’t think I would have ever placed Comic Sans in that context. It does have a childish quality about it. It's interesting how different contexts latch on to particular fonts.
ReplyDelete