Living with typographic anachronisms

Check out this blog posting, and its subsequent comment thread. Initially I was intrigued, and then as I continued to read through the commenting, and people got vicious about who should get blamed for what, I got disgusted. So I commented. It was a good comment. Hopefully it hasn’t been deleted by the editorial staff.

Design Observer: writings about design & culture: Good Font, Shame About The Reporting: “h”

My comment:

While a typophile myself, I am also a fan of entertainment. Mr. Nee is spot on with his comments. Even though this is a film made by a team of people who purportedly represent the best in their field, a 20+ comment rant on the eccentricities of Helvetica over Akzidenz or if the Art Director or the NYT Reporter should have their head guillotined is a rather pathetic example of how human nature is dissarmingly apathetic.

Consider this entirely hypothetical situation: a low-socioeconomic-status, low-income resident of New York has come into the Public Library to search the book catalog, or find the status of a claim made. Because this person is of low-income (perhaps due to an imbalance in the wealth distribution) they are using public computers to do their research. Someone on the computer before them has left this site open, with this particular comment thread. Imagine this individual’s disgust or dismay. What this individual must be thinking should be of concern to how our profession is projected: “who are these rich snobs to think that a single detail in a film should cause an Art Director’s defamation” or perhaps “go*da*n these upper-class yuppies arguing about nothin, while my brothers and sisters are struggling to make ends meet”.

Let me conclude by paraphrasing Milton Glaser - a good designer is a good citizen. Before we worry about any sort of anacrhonism, we should consider how our professional actions affect the world around us.

Thanks for listening.