Radical typography
ln...@panix.com
arts movement of the 1920s, particularly in Germany and Soviet Russia,
had on the rest of society until this day. While the story of the
Bauhaus impact on architecture, interior and furniture design is
relatively well-known, radical typography deserves greater study. The
recent publication of Jan Tschichold's "The New Typography" (U. Cal,
1995) helps enormously. It is the first translation of the 1928 German
handbook/manifesto. Not only is it a theoretical statement of European
left-modernism, it is also a practical guide for designers.
Tschichold, the son of a Leipzig sign-painter, started out as a
calligrapher in the early 1920s. He became converted to left-modernism
after attending the exhibition of the Weimar Bauhaus in the summer of
1923. Next he became a devotee of the Russian avant-garde. In honor of
the revolutionary east, he began to spell his first name "Iwan"
instead of Johannes, the name his father--of Slavic origins--had given
him.
"The New Typography" is also an excellent introduction to the social
history of art, as Tschichold places such schools as Constructivism,
Dadaism, etc. into a political context, as the excerpt below makes
clear.
In March 1933, Tschichold was taken into 'protective custody' by the
Nazis, as part of a sweep against those considered 'cultural
bolsheviks'. After being released, he fled to Switzerland where he
continued in his craft. Because of the general lack of a political
milieu, he found himself concentrating more and more on book design.
From 1946 to 1949, he oversaw the typographic reform of Penguin Books.
In addition to the excerpt from the book below, I have also placed 3
interesting graphical examples on the Marxism list website that
illustrate his concerns. The first is an "Invitation to a Dadaist
Evening" referred to in the paragraph below
(http://www.marxmail.org/dada.jpg). Next is a page from a book of
Mayakovsky poetry designed by Eli Lissitzky, whose work Tschichold
regards as "pre-eminent" in his field.
(http://www.marxmail.org/lissitzky.jpg). Finally, there is a page from
"The New Typography" which illustrates the author's own design
concepts. (http://www.marxmail.org/tschichold.jpg). Two things should
be noted. One, the type face is "sans serif". He regarded earlier
serif styles as conservative, especially the Gothic style that had
predominated in the late 19th century. The other thing is the lack of
a skipped line between paragraphs. Although he does not comment on it,
I suspect that he would regard such a device as wasteful of resources.
The left-modernists of the 1920s hated anything that did not serve an
immediate function. With my bifocals, I personally would have
preferred the skipped line but what the hey....]
TSCHICHOLD:
The young generation to whom the war had given importance, and who
were disgusted with the rotten individualistic culture of the pre-war
period. threw themselves into the Dada movement as being expressive of
their own ideas. The tendency of this movement, deriving from a few
anti-war intellectuals who had fled to Switzerland, was negative. Its
leaders in Germany published in June 1917 a prospectus Neue Jugend
(New Youth), which is one of the earliest and most significant
documents of the New Typography. We find in it already its most
typical characteristics: freedom from traditional styles of
composition, strong contrasts in type sizes, design, and colour, type
set at all sorts of angles, all kinds of type, and the use of
photography. Overheated impotence against the capitalistic war found
literary expression in political articles: "Men must be made of india
rubber." "Pray with head to the wall," "Work work work work: Triumph
of Christian Science." and so on. The external form of the paper
reflects the chaos of the period. In France, where some of the Swiss
Dadaists were hiding, Dada took on a more lyrical character. It made
propaganda for "L但rt abstrait," Abstract Art; it had no political
aims. In typography it broke completely with tradition and made
uninhibited use of every kind of typographical material which, like
the example shown on p. 57, sometimes made a "charade of dynamic
values" (Kurtz). This interesting work can only be appreciated in a
purely painterly sense: most genuine printers, unaware of its strong
painterly qualities, which of course are utterly untypographic. can
only view it with incomprehension.
Tim Vanhoof
> radical typography deserves greater study. The
> recent publication of Jan Tschichold's "The New Typography" (U. Cal,
> 1995) helps enormously. It is the first translation of the 1928 German
> handbook/manifesto. Not only is it a theoretical statement of European
> left-modernism, it is also a practical guide for designers.
I wish the editors of my party's paper would read it ;-)
> From 1946 to 1949, he oversaw the typographic reform of Penguin Books.
>
It's worth noting that Tschichold later revised his earlier radical
typographic views and advocated more classical---I don't want to say
conservative---typography. Anyone who is familiar with old Penguin Books
will recognise that their design does not have much to do with Bauhaus
style. I'm not aware of any more political writing in his later work,
though, so I wouldn't necessarily represent this as a general move to
the right. Perhaps one could draw a very vague analogy to the Russian
Proletkult. As is well known, Trotsky defended "bourgeois" literature as
part of a human heritage which was to be reconquered, not rejected.
--
Brecht die Macht der Banken und Konzerne!
Turn Prague into Seattle 23.--26. September 2000
ln...@panix.com
wrote:
>It's worth noting that Tschichold later revised his earlier radical
>typographic views and advocated more classical---I don't want to say
>conservative---typography. Anyone who is familiar with old Penguin Books
>will recognise that their design does not have much to do with Bauhaus
>style. I'm not aware of any more political writing in his later work,
>though, so I wouldn't necessarily represent this as a general move to
>the right. Perhaps one could draw a very vague analogy to the Russian
>Proletkult. As is well known, Trotsky defended "bourgeois" literature as
>part of a human heritage which was to be reconquered, not rejected.
This is true. He turned toward a "new traditionalist" style and became
a harsh critic of his own earlier style and all that was associated
with it. To an extent, he was probably so traumatized by the
experience of fascism that he equated the kind of left-modernism of
his youth with Hitler's worship of naked industrial power. He wrote in
1946:
"Its [the new typography] intolerant attitude certainly corresponds in
particular to the German inclination to the absolute: its military
will-to-order and its claim to sole power correspond to those fearful
components of German-ness which unleashed Hitler's rule and the Second
World War."
ln...@panix.com
I am not sure what you mean by "radical typography". The
Bauhaus were certainly exemplars of European
"left-modernism", but is their typography (specifically,
Tshichold's) intrinsically "radical" in a political sense?
Perhaps, if a reaction against inhibition, a search for
innovation, "thinking outside the box", a questioning of all
accepted forms and practices, etc. are seen to lead to
left-wing views and praxis. But Tschichold seems more
tentative in your excerpt (which is admittedly describing a
Bauhaus precursor, an incubator of the "new typography"):
"The tendency of this [Dada] movement... was negative. ...
Overheated impotence against the capitalistic war found
literary expression in political circles.... The external
form of the paper [Neue Jugend] reflects the chaos of the
period. In France... Dada took on a more lyrical character.
It made propaganda for ‘L'Art abstrait,' Abstract Art; it
had no political aims."
My skepticism is inspired to some degree by the facility
with which capitalist advertising appropriated the Bauhaus
display styles (as so much else!). The art form itself had
no social content; it was the artist who gave it social and
political meaning. In our society it is the advertising
industry above all that drives typographical trends. And
advertising is designed not to persuade or convince, but to
shout for attention, to dazzle and seduce.
Function or purpose is what primarily dictates the choice of
an appropriate typeface. Assertive artistry is fine for
poster art, but when it comes to literary text, legibility
is key. As one of my favourite type design books states: "It
is not enough that the typeface you choose be esthetically
pleasing; it must also be comfortable to read. The type
should be ‘invisible', that is, it should not intrude itself
between the reader and the thought expressed on the printed
page. This applies especially to sustained reading, such as
books, magazines, and newspapers. People are very
conservative in their reading habits, regardless of how
radical they may be in other areas of their lives...."
(James Craig, Designing with type, rev. ed. 1980, p. 123).
Hence Tschichold's comment that the New Typography "can only
be appreciated in a purely painterly sense: most genuine
printers, unaware of its strong painterly qualities, which
of course are utterly untypographic, can only view it with
incomprehension."
Sans-serif types (uniform weight, no serifs, somewhat
impersonal) are particularly well adapted for display
purposes, but I find them tiresome for lengthy text
passages. But you are quite right, serifed types are widely
perceived as conservative. For many years the French
Trotskyists (and their cothinkers throughout Europe) used
sans-serif typefaces almost exclusively in their weekly
paper Rouge, probably out of similar ideological concerns!
This is to say that I think your use of sans-serif on the
home page is appropriate, but I would not recommend it for
longer texts. As for "skipped lines" between paragraphs,
these are unnecessary so long as other devices are adopted
to indicate paragraphing, such as indented first lines.
Typography is a function of technology: Gutenberg's
invention of movable type, the creation of the typewriter
and the linotype, and more recently phototypesetting and
computerization. Of course, all such developments have their
origin in social needs (a literate workforce, the
propagation of religion or other ideologies, etc.). But as a
technological form, typography can serve any social purpose
or interest. If we associate particular ideologies with
particular typefaces or schools of design in general, it is
because of the way in which artistic styles tend to reflect
— albeit only indirectly — particular modes of political
thought or expression. The stadium at Nuremberg or
Mussolini's monuments (e.g. the railway station in Milan) we
now instinctively associate with fascism and repression,
while Tatlin's Monument to the Third International and
Lissitzky's Lenin Tribune (neither realized, appropriately)
remind us of the liberatory promise of the Bolshevik
revolution.
One of the great attractions of typography as an art form,
of course, is the way in which it combines design with
technology, not to mention its association with literacy,
our greatest accomplishment as humans. It almost epitomizes
the transition from ape to man!
Interestingly, the creation of the personal computer, and
with it the phenomenon of desktop publishing — and the ease
with which new typefaces could be created electronically —
created much new interest in the use and design of varied
fonts and typography. But no sooner had this process got
under way than the arrival of the Internet, with the
corresponding need for universally recognizable typefaces
and legibility cut the other way, and led to a temporary
decline in interest in typography among many internauts.
Most texts published on the net do not even use serifed
quotation marks, for example.
However, new advances such as Java may revive interest in
typographical issues and spur the use of more exotic fonts
for in-line communication.
Well, those are just a few random thoughts prompted by your
note. Thanks for the tip on the Tschichold book. I'll make a
point of getting it. I developed an interest in typography
back in the early 1980s, following my exit from the Fourth
International, when I took a job as a proofreader and
typesetter in a large printing plant. I worked the midnight
shift, with occasionally a lot of down-time, so I persuaded
an older coworker who had lost his job at the Globe and Mail
when they moved to cold type to teach me the rudiments of
the Linotype machine. What fun!
Richard