<< Sven Birkerts Contra Lit Blogging: Tumbling Dice | Front Page | Hunting the Horny Back Toad? (Lyrical Pareidolia Monday) >>
Sunday, August 05, 2007
I Sought the Serif (but I swear it was in self-deee-fense)
Our John Emerson has a new book out - Substantific Marrow - and he has found a favorable reviewer (who thinks less well of little old us, but that’s fine):
That’s John Emerson in a nutshell, and he’s worth the combined intellect of the various dull group blogs (Unfogged, Crooked Timber, The Valve) where he insists on playing the commenter. The use of Arial seems at first insignificant—but the marrow is that it conveys his unpolished ramshackle better than justified serifs would.
Emerson on fonts:
All of the serif fonts available in my software look fussy to me. I just don’t like serifs, I guess. I considered Fraktur, but that didn’t seem practical.
Comments
I won’t respond to font questions. I just don’t like serifs, and don’t have software to produce the really nice sans-serif that people say is better than Arial.
I deplore and in no way condone negative comments made about Unfogged, Crooked Timber, and The Valve.
I also did not mean it when I said that Harry Potter fans were probably all crack babies. This is almost certainly not true.
I’m glad the reviewer didn’t mention the dull group blog where Emerson occasionally plays the poster (The Weblog).
Inspired by the review, I think that Emerson’s next book—regardless of the topic—should be entitled “Slobbism is a Humanism.”
The next book will be called “Cursing the Darkness”.
Wow, a Valve citation!
I unconditionally retract all negative comments about the Valve.
Everyone knows that the action at unfogged is in the comments, where Emerson’s participation is precisely what ensures that it is not dull.
Dull. Honestly.
FWIW, there was a bit of a to-do about Helvetica a few weeks/months ago on the web. Helvetic seems to have been the type George Lucas chose for the rolling history at the beginning of the original “Star Wars.” It was also popular in Nazi Germany, I believe. Anyhow, Ariel is Microsoft’s knock-off of Helvetica. It’s not quite the same—a little googling should turn up an article or two highlighting the (subtle) differences.
I don’t see that this has Jack sh*t do to with what Emerson actually says in his essays. I’ve not looked at the book, but I’ve read a number of his essays. I like them.
"FWIW, there was a bit of a to-do about Helvetica a few weeks/months ago on the web...”
That wasn’t “the web”; it was right here at home, Toto:
http://www.thevalve.org/go/valve/article/the_fascist_font_of_star_wars/
Apologies: I’m sitting in front of a French computer and can’t find the keys (literally can’t locate the necessary keys on this counterintuitive all-laid-out-wrong French keyboard) to embed that link neatly.
Why, so it was.
The problem with Arial and many other of the free-as-in-beer fonts is not what you see, but what lies between. When type gets set and printed on paper, most printers will get rid of the amateur appearance by using a friendly font.
The grey tone of the page is dependent on the density of the copy and it changes according to the font. For instance, you might think Helvetica a fairly light font, but compare it to a page of Bitstream Vera. This is how I most often judge a page. If an author wants a particular font, the various spacing values have to be adjusted. That’s where a well designed font shines and a poor one goes schizoid. THEN the differences are not subtle at all.