<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Typographic Love</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mslk.com/reactions/typographic-love/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mslk.com/reactions/typographic-love/</link>
	<description>reactions from a design firm in queens</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Aug 2010 16:09:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Stefan</title>
		<link>http://mslk.com/reactions/typographic-love/comment-page-1/#comment-4541</link>
		<dc:creator>Stefan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:14:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mslk.com/reactions/?p=1680#comment-4541</guid>
		<description>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&#039;s about courage, and its about beauty. Symmetry is overated.
Not all communication is about legibility

Love Stefan</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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&#8217;s about courage, and its about beauty. Symmetry is overated.<br />
Not all communication is about legibility</p>
<p>Love Stefan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Craig Ward</title>
		<link>http://mslk.com/reactions/typographic-love/comment-page-1/#comment-2037</link>
		<dc:creator>Craig Ward</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 16:12:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mslk.com/reactions/?p=1680#comment-2037</guid>
		<description>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&#039;s a lot to be said for intriguing typography.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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.</p>
<p>I think there&#8217;s a lot to be said for intriguing typography.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Miriam Sakol</title>
		<link>http://mslk.com/reactions/typographic-love/comment-page-1/#comment-1534</link>
		<dc:creator>Miriam Sakol</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Sep 2008 16:25:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mslk.com/reactions/?p=1680#comment-1534</guid>
		<description>I think it sucks! As some wise advertising pro once said, &quot;Art Directors don&#039;t know how to read!&quot; It&#039;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. &#039; Tis a pity that, they, too, can&#039;t read.
As for me--and I&#039;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&#039;m about to read, and not have to play games to decipher it. As for the NY Times mag, what I&#039;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!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it sucks! As some wise advertising pro once said, &#8220;Art Directors don&#8217;t know how to read!&#8221; It&#8217;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. &#8216; Tis a pity that, they, too, can&#8217;t read.<br />
As for me&#8211;and I&#8217;m one of a vanishing breed, alas&#8211;I treasure the English language and I sure as hell would like to know the TITLE of the article I&#8217;m about to read, and not have to play games to decipher it. As for the NY Times mag, what I&#8217;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!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
