Be Fussy

Written by Typographica on June 20, 2005

“One more attribute the modern typographer must have: the capacity for taking great pains with seemingly unimportant detail. To him, one typographical point must be as important as one inch, and he must harden his heart against the accusation of being too fussy.”

— Hans P. Schmoller

As found in the opening pages of Geoffrey Dowding’s “Finer Points in the Spacing & Arrangement of Type”, which, though slightly antiquated, is not a bad companion to the Bringhurst bible — despite what my good colleague Todd Dominey says in his Amazon review. It’s true that the two books do share some of the same information, but I find it helps to read something important more than once, especially if it comes from distinct voices.

11 Comments

  1. Rob Sawkins says:

    :: Steven
    Maybe fussy is a bit too prissy;o)? How about ‘tireless in attention to detail’? A bit long-winded maybe, but I totally agree with the sentiment, so ‘chapeau’ for the quote. It came just at the right time, when a hot sun makes a relaxing afternoon by the river look much more appealing then another hour or so doing kerning pairs in Albertina.

    No shortcuts
    In this typographic game, there’s no quick fix solutions � ‘all for $9.99 inc tax.’ If you see such offers, ignore them. Snake oil it is.

    Let me sign off with a nod to one of my favourite typographic primers (which has the same quote above on page 14). I’m sure all your readers have read it, but just in case, check out Ryhme & Reason by Erik Spiekermann.

    As Erik says, ‘there are many ways to bake parrot.’

  2. Type is one of the most under-respected parts of the graphic design industry. I know from my own design education (reading Crystal Goblet, Bringhurst, stop staling sheep, Gills book) that type is barely taught in schools. 90% of the type I see today is badly kerned and has been set by a computer without the slightest nudging by a graphic designer. The personal publishing boom has led to more acute typographic tools which designers (and non-designers) assume resolves them of the responsibility to typeset their work.

    Most, if not all, of the students that come to intern or work at our firm need extensive type training and really it shouldn’t be our job to educate them. The students we see just aren’t fussy enough (or have tireless attention to detail). They don’t recognize that type is important and that getting bent out of shape because a hyphen needs to be raised in a telephone number is a good thing. What I’m saying is, we need more fussy people coming out of school that are taught to be fussy.

  3. Rob Sawkins says:

    :: Ben
    I totally agree that the graphic design industry needs new graduates to be of a better type, so-to-speak. So why has detail (and it’s close associate, concentration) slipped down the priority list?

    Grumpy Old Man Rants
    Without tying to take a sideswipe at educators (I’ve seen the daft accounting pressures they have to fit into a teaching schedule), perhaps it’s a result of less reading, more coffee table book browsing and of course more TV.

    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    Good typography rule #1
    It should elucidate, be in harmony with,
    and give appropriate form to the text
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    But then I would say that being a recovering academic book designer, who incidentally, has his fair share of ‘design glossies’ on his shelves. Don’t you just love the dolls house effect of reduced scale, printed on a cracking good stock, all stitched together nicely and covered in a cool jacket. Enough already, Ed.

    In my book, the best writing is like the best design � it doesn�t call attention to itself � so perhaps in this ‘celebrity age’, the crystal argument just doesn’t cut it with current teachers and students. It’s just not pushy enough.

    Even Robin Fior’s updated version of the container metaphor still doesn’t cut-the-mustard with the me generation: ‘Crystal is cut to remove the bubbles and refract the contents and the light. Not a bad ambition for the designer afterall.’

    Aside: From the looks of your site(s), your interns will learn a lot. Great work.

  4. Ben,

    I could’nt agree more. I don’t think that one of the interns we have had at our firm has had the slightest bit of typographic training.

    I had actually gone as far as instituting a rule that required the interns read (twice) Bringhurst’s book.

    On a more positive note, I do know that our State University (ASU) has added Bringhurst’s book as manditory reading material in which the will actually be tested.

    I recall a conversation with an inturn that went something like this: “But, man.. you know, I’m just not a ‘type guy'”; to which I replied “Then your definately not a ‘designer’ either. Pack up your stuff and go back to school.”

  5. jlt says:

    I am profoundly and utterly amazed / disappointed / aghast at the spectacularly poor spelling abilities of (some of) those of you who – here, in this very forum – suggest the increased use of Bringhurst’s excellent book. Perhaps the lack of attention to detail that we all bemoan is something that should be taken care of at home first.

  6. Nick Shinn says:

    >So why has detail (and it�s close associate, concentration) slipped down the priority list?

    I’m not sure it has.
    Cut to Helvetica Meditation #12: The Migration of Interest.
    It shows a plain setting of a generic typeface — not much detail there?

    Well, not in a traditional sense, which is all about choice of typeface, size, leading, kerning, etc.

    But that’s old hat, and anyone with a computer can do it.
    So now there’s a gradient in there, and a highlight.

    With digital, first we got horizontal scaling and tracking to play with. Then dropshadows, gradients, faux effects, transparency. And finally “new” media: web and interactive (eg magnetic cursor, Typedrawing, etc.), and animation (see QT movie in recent Typographica story on Oxtail). It’s all typography.

    All this is part of the curriculum now, so the old basics don’t get the widespread attention they used to — although they do have their strongholds.

  7. AlliJack says:

    Amen on the details comments. Your right�fussing over spelling details can be just as imporntat.

    In defense of the recent grads… I did get type instruction in school (Typography: 1 & 2 as a prereq. for more GD classes), but a GD history program hadn’t yet been developed at my school. Historical perspective and related assignments were woven into other curriculum, but I still feel somewhat uninformed about GD history while I do feel comfortable with type.

    What gives? I’ll continue educating myself as a young professional, I suppose. I guess I didn’t leave school armed with absolutely ALL the knowledge I’ll need for the rest of my career.

    I’d be a great intern, by the way. I know type. And contrary to my previous example, I do know the difference between your and you’re. Any takers?

  8. H�ctor Mu�oz Huerta says:

    I have been interviewed three times when appliyng for a design job, twice in design studios and once in a newspaper (I jot two of the three jobs).

    Well, In none of the interviews I caused the minimal interest when I said that I had certain interests and habilites with type (which are pretty rare around here). They simply didn’t care.

    Graphic design in M�xico has still a long way to go with type.

  9. Reminiscor says:

    Dare I say that students shouldn�t just read the books, but look at the work; Tschichold�s & Schmoller�s work (and a whole group of designers working in the early to late middle 20th century: from Ruder to B�chler to Hostettler to Simon to Caflisch to Rogers to Kapr to…. well you can fill in the gaps) on close inspection and discussion will tell you more than most writing.

  10. It would be too easy to say there has been a decline in common sense. Probably that’s partly true. Digital tools have encouraged their share of bad typography in the form of squishing, tight setting, and pointless or poorly applied effects.

    Then, examine material made before digital tools were widespread, and you’ll find plenty of second-rate typography. Going further back, in metal days the technical standard was not great; fine typesetting on a technical level approaching the default output of today’s equipment was the exception (ink spread notwithstanding). Artistic achievement is something else.

    ‘Twas ever thus. But yes, the influx of untrained type users has definitely lowered the bar & compromised the art.

    Prominent in my mind is the overwhelming distraction and gee-whiz factor of current media presentations. So much of it is so frenetic and fast-moving, glittery; for the younger generations quality and attention to detail count for little, while pace, flashiness and impact dominate.

    The personal publishing boom has led to more acute typographic tools which designers (and non-designers) assume resolves them of the responsibility to typeset their work.

    In many instances yes, naive practitioners assume digital typesetting tools guarantee excellent typography, without realizing their ‘achievement’ is undistinguished & commonplace. The same piddling standard of incompetence is repeated everywhere.

    Equally culpable is a widespread non-awareness of what type & typography actually is, how it works, and its affectations. Anyone with a computer has the tools, but too few have firm ideas on what to do with it. A simple analogy, “I got this pencil, see, and an assignment to make an artistic drawing of my model, but I haven’t the faintest whiff of a direction.”

    Worse than that, an alarming number aren’t aware they’re supposed to be doing anything at all with the type they set, short of pouring insipid ‘content’ into a box and getting it printed.

    We need more threads like this one to draw attention to the problem.

  11. Jim Leonardson says:

    I would like to quote A. Doyle Moore, Professor Emeritus of Graphic Design, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign;

    “You don’t have to learn any of this, but your competition already knows it.”

    In the real world I have found no shortage of art directors who are willing to drop their standards, accept good enough and move on to the next job rather than be fussy. The Professors who taught me typography were more strict than any art director I have worked with. These directors seemed to be using a trial and error “run it through the mill again” process instead of a method of refinement and reason.

Post a Comment

Comments at Typographica are moderated and copyedited, just like newspaper “Letters to the Editor”. Abusive or off-topic comments are not published. We appreciate compliments, but don’t publish them unless they add to the dialog. Thank you!