[week 10] Response+Discussion: King

[Prof. Madad]

Post your responses to:
Thirty-six point Gorilla by Emily King

[Rose DeMaria]

This article has made me feel a bit ignorant because I have never
thoroughly thought about why typefaces were being named what they are
and/or the history and origins that the name is implying. I never
thought there was so much history of the typeface being described just
in its name. I feel like this has opened my eyes very much. As of the
19th century it has become standard to name your typeface, ownership
was never a problem until then, but now it certainly is. There were a
few points that i found interesting. I found the point made about how
the name for helvetica can maybe take some credit for its success is
very interesting. I'm not sure I'm convinced on that argument but it
is an compelling one. Another point that was interesting was seeing
Frere-Jones method of naming type. The process is way more
complicated, intricate and way more meaningfully thought out than I
ever thought it was.

[Emily Vukson]

Response to Thirty-six Point Gorilla by Emily King

Emily King proceeds to talk about the names of typefaces in her
article, and how much history is attached to them. I knew that some
of the older, 'classic' typefaces such as Goudy, Garamond, Bodoni,
etc. were named after the designers who made them, and that
Helvetica's name was changed from "Neue Haas-Grotesk" because it was
hard for non-German speaking people to pronounce (and it was a rather
ugly sounding name), but I never really knew that that much work
nowadays was put into naming a face. As far as I knew, I just thought
that designers would look at their newly created typeface and call it
whatever came to their mind first, but King states that "some typeface
names clearly reveal the ideas and beliefs behind them."

Nowadays, however, (since evidently it is considered politically
incorrect or at least 'uncool' to name a typeface after yourself) I
have found that typefaces are given some of the most outlandish names,
such as A Yummy Apology, Little Lord Font Leroy, Tape Worm, Atomic
Clock Radio, Dancing Donuts, and Whoop Ass just to name a few. (www.
1001freefonts.com) Sure, typeface names are very important to
identify and characterize a face, but 'Whoop Ass?' What has this all
come to??

[Jacqueline Marinacci]

"Choose between Evensong and Midnight and you are making a decision
of degree, not of kind." (King.p1) Emily King uses an example everyone
could relate to; choosing a color to flood a room. It is going to
accent a certain emotion, style and possibly reinforce the
architectural design. By choosing a typeface, one must consider the
viewer and decided what this type face is going to embellish or
distort.

"Sure, typeface names are very important to identify and
characterize a face, but 'Whoop Ass?' What has this all come

to??" (vukson) Emily Vukson brings up a good point about type faces
today and King as well. when it comes down to naming a typeface one
can take the cliché path and use there name, others more seen today
will use profanity, slang and catchy phrases. Reason being, the
designer who used his last name will get recognition immediately and
people will always associate him to his type face. People who choose
to use profanity and slang in there typefaces are appealing to a
smaller target, as someone who knows type, appreciates good craft will
almost defiantly not use whoop ass. I mean, could you imagine yourself
going in front of a client and telling them you changed there
preciously kerned Caslon logo with Woop ass! I Don't know if they will
be returning your calls soon.
There is an exception though. "With both face and band emerging
from a post-punk sensibility, the most obvious example is Blur." We
all have seen these destroyed font, scratched heavy fonts, but do we
consider the designers background? Is it important wether of not they
are familiar with good type / history? Do we let anyone just break the
rules without learning them first? Obviously enough these fonts aren't
use to set a load of text but can make an interesting entrance to the
upcoming text.

[May Meyers]

Response to Thirty-six Point Gorilla by Emily King

King’s article delves into the history and meaning of typeface names,
from the traditional to the absurd; Like Rose, I was surprised to find
so much rhyme and reason to a process that I would have guessed was a
bit more arbitrary. I would hope that success of a typeface has more
to do with its form and functionality than the moniker attached to it,
and I would choose a type designer based on his or her type designing
prowess as opposed to type naming skills.
I believe that a typeface name should do the following: it should
clearly distinguish itself from other fonts, it should refrain from
being too offensive (as this could limit its use) and it shouldn’t be
too difficult to pronounce. Other than this, I don’t think it really
matters whether it’s the designer’s name, the designer’s cat’s name,
something descriptive, or pretentious, or fanciful. If someone has put
in the work to create a typeface they should be able to call it
whatever they want without worrying about its syllable count or
whether it ends in a vowel.
While I felt that King provided a wealth of interesting information,
valuable to any design or type student, I am much more interested in
learning how to design than how to choose a name. Like me, I doubt
very many people select a typeface based on its name anyway. A name
like Whoop Ass will pique my curiosity enough to view the typeface,
but that’s about it. Good type design is seen in the letterforms
themselves, and if something looks perfect in my design I couldn’t
care less what it’s called.

On Nov 4, 4:28 pm, "Prof. Madad" <ama...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Victoriya Baskin]

for some reason the link to the reading is not opening on my computer.
can someone somehow try to send it to me?

[Victoriya Baskin]

I got it to work!


I have always wondered how typefaces are named. was it just a cool
word the designer came up with, or heard somewhere out in the street
"Futura....YES! that sounds sweet!" or was it something more deep,
maybe realistic, or quite possibly robotic. I feel that naming a
typeface is almost like naming a child. A designer slaves and works
for a long time to produce something that is perfect, the name must be
perfect as well. I feel this relates to a lot of things in the artists
world. Although the actual typeface is the work produced, the name
should probably reflect it.

I liked this article because it explained how different people use
different system for naming their typefaces. Tobias Frere-Jones i feel
had the funniest system. Each name must have three syllables, the
second must have the emphasis, and the whole name should end with a
vowel perferably an a. Its a little ridiculous, i think as long as the
name is catchy and not too crazy so lots of people could relate to it,
it would work as a typeface name. I do admit though, Frere-Jones's
system does work for a bunch of names in my fontbook. Its just silly
to think that each name must be so similar, you still want to give the
designer some way of making his baby a little bit more human. A name
is a perfect way to do that. Designers are not robots, their work
should not feel like it was produced by a machine (unless that is its
intended feeling) that spits out programmed typefaces names.

[Patamavadee Nguiakaramahawongse]

This article is definitely interesting in that it talks about how each
typeface was names. Like Victoriya, I've always thought that typefaces
were named arbitrarily, something that sounded cool or maybe a little
of the designer's personal history. However, it is eye-opening to
learn that naming the typeface is the hardest part of type design
process, as Tobias Free-Jones claimed. Maybe it's relative? Might be
hard for some designers and effortless for some.

I find Free-Jones' system for naming typefaces a little unbelievable.
I might be wrong, but the whole three syllables and ending the name
with a vowel (preferably A) is a little crazy and TOO thought out. I
feel the designer should name it what ever they want to, even
'Untitled One' or 'Whoop Ass,' since it's their sweat and soul that
was put into crafting the typefaces. The whole system that claims to
make the name more successful is a far stretch, and I don't think I
can agree with that.

[Inyoung Choi]

I am surely interested in this article because I have always wondered how designers make the name of typefaces.

I was surprised to find the process that naming typeface and reflect to relate to new naming and designers' effort and thought.

 

Also, it's very interesting Patamavadee's opinion.

I agree with her thought that the designer should name it what ever they want to, even 'Untitled One' or 'Whoop Ass," since it's their sweat and soul that was put into crafting the typefaces.

[Olivia Gulin]

King's essay, 36 point Gorilla, traces the historical approaches to and problems with naming typefaces. Considering how much thought goes into the process of conceiving and designing a type family, I can't imagine compressing it into a single word. Looking at the history of type names, though, most do seem to be successful in one way or another. King points to names like DIN and Futura reflecting the ideals of a modernized utopia. Names like Garamond and Caslon relfect an interest in history, and at the opposite end of the spectrum, names like Dead History reject it.

I suppose, however, the naming of a face is just like naming anything else-- the name of the essay, "36 Point Gorilla," is clearly intended to playfully arouse interest and indirectly reference the text. King herself compares the naming of faces to that of furniture, paint swatches, and even cars. Abstracting and simplifying sets of work to names is often a difficult process, but when successful, can communicate a sense of what they're describing. I guess in some ways, its a sort of practical poetry.

--
- OG
http://www.oliviagulin.com

[Danielle Heard]

This was a very interesting article. When looking through t=fonts on
the computer or in books, you cannot help to wonder why? or what does
this mean? To be honest I never thought so much went into naming
typfaces. While some designers may incorporate their names, I thought
most of them where just silly. After reading this article, I found
out how different designers went about producing a name for their
typeface. One method that I agree with is going back in history to
name your typeface. Using elements of the past to describe your
typeface. That is a method that I would be likely to use. Though so
much cant be put into the name. If the typeface does not stand out or
is not well known, no one will know the name. This is why I thought
that the system for naming typefaces is ridiculous, "the name must
have three syllables; the stress must be upon the second syllable; the
name must end with a vowel, preferably a "(King_pg.2).

On Nov 9, 9:11 am, Olivia Gulin <oligu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> King's essay, 36 point Gorilla, traces the historical approaches to and
> problems with naming typefaces. Considering how much thought goes into the
> process of conceiving and designing a type family, I can't imagine
> compressing it into a single word. Looking at the history of type names,
> though, most do seem to be successful in one way or another. King points to
> names like DIN and Futura reflecting the ideals of a modernized utopia.
> Names like Garamond and Caslon relfect an interest in history, and at the
> opposite end of the spectrum, names like Dead History reject it.
>
> I suppose, however, the naming of a face is just like naming anything else--
> the name of the essay, "36 Point Gorilla," is clearly intended to playfully
> arouse interest and indirectly reference the text. King herself compares the
> naming of faces to that of furniture, paint swatches, and even cars.
> Abstracting and simplifying sets of work to names is often a difficult
> process, but when successful, can communicate a sense of what they're
> describing. I guess in some ways, its a sort of practical poetry.
>

[Alison Marana]

A name is vital. It shapes the perceptions that a person develops
before truly understanding a subject. Preconceived notions might be
superficial, but organizing and defining things by name is relevant.
If someone is baking, the substances in their cabinet must be named
"sugar", "flour", and "bleach". Without distinguished names, the
bleach might end up in this person's muffins. To communicate with
people, a system of names is necessary. Discussing a particular "Jane
Johnson" is much different than discussing any female brunette with
blue eyes. In a conversation, this brunette could possibly be anyone
in the world with brown hair, if she did not have a name to organize
and define her. Even the words "brunette" and "female" are names:
they serve the purpose of categorizing a subject, in the same way that
typefaces are categorized by foundry or designer names.

When I was a child (and still sort of now), I wanted to be the person
who names Crayola crayon colors. Something seemed so important and
special about this career choice. A name could alter my opinion about
a color. Black was no longer ugly and dark, it was called "Licorice"-
candy that I have always associated with my mother- and it became an
acceptable color to use.

In the discussion of typography, a name also has the same effect of
conjuring an opinion. CAC Pinafore is automatically cute because it
is named after something frilly and feminine (this typeface is
actually a handdrawn script, and is true to its name). Sometimes
names are based on adjectives associated with physical qualities of a
font. Other times it is impossible to detect why a certain typeface
was named, without a historical background. The article mentions that
Nimrod is an "aggressive" word, and the font was named in order to
attract attention in a sea of neutral newspaper typefaces. Exocet
sounds "elegant" and "monumental". If a designer needs such a font,
the name Exocet will attract them.

On Nov 4, 4:28 pm, "Prof. Madad" <ama...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Daisy Chong]

What I got out of this article was the history of naming fonts, which
was, well, interesting. Myself, I've only been slightly curious on how
the names came to be. "The act of naming a font often requires
designers to confront their history" Quite often in articles I've
read, many things were connected to knowing [x] history before doing
anything else, and this would be one example I agree with. Another
point, as well as agreeing with some responses, would be that if
someone were designing a new typeface or, changing one, one would want
to name it after their last name for prolonged recognition and a
larger target audience. Newer typefaces these days have quite
ridiculous names. I found reading the different ways of naming type
quite interesting.

On Nov 4, 4:28 pm, "Prof. Madad" <ama...@gmail.com> wrote:

[jess]

I agree with Allison. A name is vital and it shapes the way we
understand something before actually examine it. I personally never
thought much about type face names before. I had no idea that
helvetica was originally named "Neue Haas-Grotesk" and was changed
for non german speaking audiences. I find that very smart and I do
think if its name had not changed it might not be a successful as it
has become today. I did know that typefaces like Garamond and Bodoni
were named after there creaters. Its interesting how much thought and
time is put into naming a typeface and also important that name really
is.

On Nov 4, 4:28 pm, "Prof. Madad" <ama...@gmail.com> wrote: