“Words have meaning & type has feeling. When you put them together it’s spectacular.” – Paula Scher
These type treatments however, are an entirely different story.
When I first stumbled opened my email and saw the newsletter design featuring LeeLee Sobieski, I considered it disconcerting. Now that it’s cropped up for an entire month on Pinterest, I feel the need to stage an intervention.
That’s right folks, a typographic intervention.
Settle in, it’s bound to be a dorktastic ride.
Here’s my issue with this whole thing: when you experiment with typography you’re undoubtedly manipulating the way words, and therefore their messages, are read and understood. This rule goes for everything typographic across the board. Especially contrived emphasis using italics within a roman typeface. You know, the slanty’s in the uprights. It breaks a typographic “rule”, but without any sort of ‘right way’. With these, I feel the word becomes separate and disjointed for seemingly no “actual” reason. (Things that “look cool” is technically a reason, but not one that’s ever good enough for me.)
Something’s gotta be creating that reason right? Perhaps, but not always.
While it irked my eye, I wanted to hold off on any sort of commentary before I had seen “enough”. This time, enough meant collecting as many samples as they produced. I wanted to see if any of these treatments ‘worked’, or if they all felt disjointed.
In all fairness some of these do work better than others, but in the greater whole, this would have been a much better ‘less is more’ approach.
the ‘BOSS’ is okay here. But it’s just not necessary for me to see it in both words.
I just feel like letters are falling. Like poorly stacked books in the bookcase! And who likes THAT?
I actually really like the ‘IR’ in ‘GIRL’ and the ‘K’ in ‘LIKES’. It’s the ‘O’ in ‘TO’ and the ‘O’/O in ‘CHOOSE’ where I start to feel dizzy. When working with typography, it’s totally okay to use restraint and apply the treatments to the words you’re emphasizing: in this case, the GIRL who LIKES to pick AND choose, would have been find since you’re playing with the who, the what, and truly it’s the ‘and’ in this equation that makes picking/choosing special.
Here are the rest of them for your viewing pleasure. I’d hate the idea of the designer of these feeling nitpicked to death, so I’ll leave it to your own to comment as you will!
The only one that works for me is the one that uses this technique to nest a word within a longer word, providing emphasis on the ‘lux’ness of luxuries. Necessary? No.
A nice detail? Absolutely.
When you begin to manipulate emphasis, you better have a reason, or it will create a sense of being “off”. Few will be able to vocalize what “it” is, but I believe it lies in the connection of using visual typography to represent verbal ideas.