| Aug. 28, 2008 | Posted by: katie |
Typographic Love
I love great editorial design. One of things I am especially drawn to is when publications hire a typographer/designer to enhance their headings and do something definitively different for an issue. Granted the typography in this week’s New York Magazine is not the most legible face, but I do love it!
I think it sucks! As some wise advertising pro once said, “Art Directors don’t know how to read!” It’s too, too clever by half and a poor excuse for the NY Times mag. to show off how clever and avant-garde it is. ‘ Tis a pity that, they, too, can’t read.
As for me–and I’m one of a vanishing breed, alas–I treasure the English language and I sure as hell would like to know the TITLE of the article I’m about to read, and not have to play games to decipher it. As for the NY Times mag, what I’ve said above applies to the entire magazine itself, which looks more like a self-congratulatory senior project at a second-rate art school. WORDS ARE MEANT TO BE READ. They are Not design elements!
Of course, conversely, words should make you want to read them, Miriam. And I think type is surely the most basic of design elements? Would you consign most of the typography of Herb Lubalin and the futurist and dada movements to the rubbish bin? I should hope not.
I think there’s a lot to be said for intriguing typography.
I strongly disagree with Miriams comments, without diversity, experimentation and the employment of creativity your copies of raygun would be as visually stimulating as hello magazine for a start. It’s about courage, and its about beauty. Symmetry is overated.
Not all communication is about legibility
Love Stefan