Week I Response

[Sarah Nock]

According to Beatrice Warde, typography is a sensible art form. There
are certain standards that have been created, as mentioned by Kinross,
and basic principles which should be followed if one wishes to create
a work that communicates information clearly without being
distracting. Warde discusses how book typographers more than anyone
else need to have functional and transparent typography to facilitate
a connection between an author's work and the audience. I think that
there is very little room to argue against the necessity of clean type
in a book, but then she goes on to discuss type in advertisements.
Warde says that its easy to throw people off by making things too
uncomfortable/unfamiliar to a reader ad that even if you have a simple
statement your reader may be deterred. I started thinking about some
creative campaigns I have seen in the past and I wondered if Warde
would lump these into her category of "stunt typography". Even though
I realize the importance of some standards and I appreciate clean and
simple type, I don't believe that all creative type is bad typography.
I think that it is far easier to make mistakes and to be unsuccessful,
but someone with a background and knowledge of "good type" can create
something successful and exciting. I have seen creative type that is
not distracting and it's part of a whole idea being communicated to
you. Some examples of good creative type can be seen in Stefan
Sagmeister's work. I suppose there's a time, place, and audience for
everything but I think both forms of type, standard and creative, are
valuable tools.